logical reconciliation of religion and science?

[1littlebit]

i thought we should move this discussion from the creationism thread.... while it was technically still on topic it was a totally different approach to the discussion. of course you don't need to read the other thread to know what's going on here. we left off somewhere in the vicinity of science and religion having different presuppositions and thus being irreconcilable... i think. so now we have to move on to presuppositions.

so where were we? airplanes, egg free chickens, and establishing presuppositions i believe.

so is it possible to reconcile religion and science? where would we begin?


and my own self serving question was answered well enough that i now have somewhere to start.. soo... about those presuppositions that neither side can agree on...well except for the people who are religious scientists... they seem to do just fine.

[orangebird]

http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

http://www.gate.net/~rwms/hum_ape_chrom.html

I know, I know. I am still just in love with the "chromosome 2" data. Makes me all giddy inside like a little girl.

[Thao]

Oh heavens, I doubt there is any such thing as an iron-clad logical argument for the existence of God. Philosophers have been discussing it for thousands of years and haven't found one they agree on yet

But it's always fun to try! Me, I'm interested to learn what the supposed philosophical flaws are in the naturalist worldview, if anyone wants to take that on or point me to a website.

[1littlebit]

:roftlmao i actually laughed out loud .. i'm glad i'm not the only one who likes this stuff.

[orangebird]

And yeah yeah yeah, our logic is flawed (WRT the last thread). My degree was philosophy of science with my minor in mathmatics, specifically symbolic logic. Yes, we do have a "problem" of you want to call it that, the incompleteness theorem. Undecidability, yadda yadda, yeah, it's an ongoing thing.

It's fun in the classroom, but in the real world? Very limited application.

[orangebird]

Hay! Thao's indahouse!

[1littlebit]

Originally Posted by Thao

Oh heavens, I doubt there is any such thing as an iron-clad logical argument for the existence of God. Philosophers have been discussing it for thousands of years and haven't found one they agree on yet

But it's always fun to try! Me, I'm interested to learn what the supposed philosophical flaws are in the naturalist worldview, if anyone wants to take that on or point me to a website.

lol but maybe i can out smart him. :

i am with you on the philosophical flaws. i would also like to know what you have to accept as far as christianity. the presuppositions i suppose. b/c its sounds to me like you start from christianity and work backwards... which doesn't make sense to me

you can't use presuppositions that christians believe to prove christianity.. thats like presenting someone with a vegetarian and saying that this person is a vegetarian and this we are all meant to be. it just doesn't make sense.

[1littlebit]

Originally Posted by orangebird

And yeah yeah yeah, our logic is flawed (WRT the last thread). My degree was philosophy of science with my minor in mathmatics, specifically symbolic logic. Yes, we do have a "problem" of you want to call it that, the incompleteness theorem. Undecidability, yadda yadda, yeah, it's an ongoing thing.

It's fun in the classroom, but in the real world? Very limited application.

you had my dream major.

[holyhelianthus]

a logical argument in favor of god

This made me laugh out loud and I'm religious! But in all seriousness believing in God is constant work for me. So why do I? I have a few answers to that and none of them are logical. My question is is logic really the end-all? Is their a point where logic has no real meaning? Could there be more to us and the universe then what we perceive as logical?

How's that for making little sense

And hello again, OB

[1littlebit]

thats what i have always thought about people who believe in god.. like he defies logic or goes beyond it. but after reading a few threads on here where people try and use logic to show why they believe they are correct i got really interested. i am logical.. it is sort of an ingrained thing that i can't really get rid of... the existence of god has never made much sense to me... let alone these bizarre things everyone says he wants and believes... but i am willing to learn

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by 1littlebit

thats what i have always thought about people who believe in god.. like he defies logic or goes beyond it. but after reading a few threads on here where people try and use logic to show why they believe they are correct i got really interested. i am logical.. it is sort of an ingrained thing that i can't really get rid of... the existence of god has never made much sense to me... let alone these bizarre things everyone says he wants and believes... but i am willing to learn

I am actually the same way. Like I said it is work for me to believe. It's not my default. So why do I? I ask myself this often.

Really it's not that I believe my idea of God defies logic or is almighty and all powerful (mighty and powerful yes of course but not in the unreachable unobtainable sense) I just believe He is something greater than our current understanding. Then again I believe He wants us to understand Him and that is why he gave us brains and the means to use them. Science is a means to this, IMO. It doesn't tare us from God or prove He doesn't exist but instead shows us what He does and how.

BUT take into account that DH and I do believe God has to follow the natural order. As DH reminded me when I was reading the other thread and scratching my head at it where I couldn't understand what posters were getting at was probably because I don't believe God invented or formed matter- He just works with it. In my mind it has always existed. I know this goes against a lot of things on both sides but I simply do not believe in "nothingness".

I also don't believe we are so far away from God. I believe we are basically gods in embryo ourselves so it stands to reason we would be able to really see what He is doing and has done on a deeper level than just on the surface. I think we as humans sell ourselves short.

You know I am tired and pregnant so really take what I am saying with a grain of salt. I am sure I am making no sense.

Pretty much I guess I am saying that yes God supersedes our current capacity for logic. Uh.... did that make any sense?

[1littlebit]

yep that makes sense... and even if it didn't you are nearly 8 mos pg with twins... in my world you don't have to make sense anymore.

[Smokering]

What arguments have you already tried on this guy?

There are certainly many valid logical arguments for the existence of God - the arguments from reason and morality spring to mind. But validity isn't that difficult an ask; I'm assuming he wants an argument he finds convincing - which is liable to depend as much on his state of mind and prior beliefs as on the argument itself, you know?

Of course, you could always turn it back on him and ask him to provide a valid logical argument in favour of atheism. Just to mix things up.

[Thao]

Originally Posted by orangebird

And yeah yeah yeah, our logic is flawed (WRT the last thread). My degree was philosophy of science with my minor in mathmatics, specifically symbolic logic. Yes, we do have a "problem" of you want to call it that, the incompleteness theorem. Undecidability, yadda yadda, yeah, it's an ongoing thing.

It's fun in the classroom, but in the real world? Very limited application.

I tried reading about the incompleteness theorem and it's making my head spin! Does it only apply to mathematics, or does it apply to logical arguments as well? If it applies to logical arguments, it is a problem only for the naturalist worldview or for all logical worldviews?

Please use simple language! (if you can)

[Thao]

Originally Posted by Smokering

What arguments have you already tried on this guy?

There are certainly many valid logical arguments for the existence of God - the arguments from reason and morality spring to mind.

I remember the argument from morality, but what is the argument from reason?

[Bluegoat]

Is this fellow really a logical type, or does he only think he is? To generalize terribly, I've noticed that there are a lot of men who consider themselves rationalists, but they aren't really - they are more natural materialists, who are convinced by what they can see and touch. So is he an "abstract is real" guy or a "what I can see and touch is real" guy? The latter always have difficulty with philosophical proofs, they just don't find them convincing.

I find women are usually much more clear about what sort of thinkers they are, though I have no clue why.

[VisionaryMom]

Originally Posted by magstphil

My question is is logic really the end-all? Is their a point where logic has no real meaning? Could there be more to us and the universe then what we perceive as logical?

I think these questions really get to the heart of the matter. To take it out of a religious context, I'll share my thoughts on logic & rationality with regard to relationships. My husband and I both are very science-oriented. We rule with reason. I've recently been upset about something my husband has been doing. He kept defending himself; based on logical assumptions, I shouldn't be upset. I finally realized that he's absolutely right.

I shouldn't be, but I am because emotion isn't logical and is the primary influence for me in this regard. I view the religion/science debate in much the same way. Science, in my mind, is rational. It makes sense. Religion doesn't make sense in that same rational way, but faith isn't about logic. And isn't faith at the bottom of religious belief?

[Ruthla]

IMO, there is no need to "reconcile" religion and science. Science explains the way the world works, and religion talks about the reasons the world exists. In a nutshell, science explains "how" and religion explains "why."

You're not going to find any iron-clad arguments to prove the existence of G-d. That's why it's called Faith in the first place! However, you're also not going to find any iron-clad evidence that disproves the existence of G-d either. Remember "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence."

As for your athiest friend, I would ask him "Prove to me that G-d doesn't exist." He won't be able to.

[1littlebit]

he is very very rational. he is a very abstract guy... he's not much into the 'only what i can see and touch' he is very into philosophy, religion, history etc. and he is good with philosophical proofs... he is interested in metaphysics, ontology and things like that. his biggest pet peeve is when people use logic and reason as figures of speech when whatever they are saying is illogical and does not stand to reason. he says it gives people license to prove a point without actually have to prove anything nor make any sense what so ever.

we agree on certain assumptions before we start the discussions.. so what he believes is moot ... the only things we can use are what we agreed is already assumed. so just b/c he believes something it is completely non applicable unless it literally stands to reason with in the argument.

and he is working on the atheism argument... i got the god side he got the atheist side... we will switch after this.

[holyhelianthus]

Originally Posted by BrandiRhoades

I think these questions really get to the heart of the matter. To take it out of a religious context, I'll share my thoughts on logic & rationality with regard to relationships. My husband and I both are very science-oriented. We rule with reason. I've recently been upset about something my husband has been doing. He kept defending himself; based on logical assumptions, I shouldn't be upset. I finally realized that he's absolutely right.

I shouldn't be, but I am because emotion isn't logical and is the primary influence for me in this regard. I view the religion/science debate in much the same way. Science, in my mind, is rational. It makes sense. Religion doesn't make sense in that same rational way, but faith isn't about logic. And isn't faith at the bottom of religious belief?

I agree. Though I do believe their are logical arguments that's just not the point. I do think we as humans were created with these aspects of our humanity and we shouldn't be discounting one and following the other but more so trying to strike a balance. So yes, logic but also faith and hope.