Login

Join for Free!
112129 members


Religion as a pathogen

Discuss topics related to other sciences, post news that you feel our community needs to hear about. Any interesting discussions about pretty much anything are also welcome.

Moderator: BioTeam

Postby papa1983 » Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:02 am

I agree with you on that AFJ. This has more to do with morals and ethics. It's about the individual.

I believe Eugenics is wrong,a horrible practice.

As for the genes part. I see nothing wrong with that, we do share the same DNA with plants.
The man of science has learned to believe in justification, not by faith, but by verification.
Thomas H. Huxley (1825-95) English biologist.
User avatar
papa1983
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:29 pm
Location: Afghanistan

Re: Religion as a pathogen

Postby AFJ » Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:10 pm

I suppose there might be something to a certain personality type being attracted to anything predominantly metaphysical. That could be to the occult also, or people who like to watch horror flicks alot--a certain fascination with the idea of a spirit world.

On religion though, because modern day science is ingrained in our minds, many in our generation are naturalistic in philosophy. This leaves no place for revelation, which is what true religion is based on.

The wind is a good illustration of revelation. An unbeliever is like someone standing inside a building. He may occasionally walk past the window and see the trees moving--he sees the effects of something invisible, but may attribute the movement of the trees to a list of possibilities, including the fact that trees move of their own volition.

A believer claims revelation and is like someone outside by the tree. He also sees the trees moving, but also feels and hears the wind. Even though he can not see it like the unbeliever, he attributes an outside force on the trees because he feels the same effects personally.
AFJ
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:59 pm

Postby gamila » Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:17 pm

As for the genes part. I see nothing wrong with that, we do share the same DNA with plants

imagine what is being done in american british russian and chinese secret military biological labs
to see science as a pathogen
we have all seen the images of monkeys being used to test military technology
what about those films of american soldier walking toward the Abomb mush room cloud for scientific research

i once saw an interview with an amercian biologist women who put radioactive iodine in milk to see what effects it would have on babies
she was adament it was all done for science
gamila
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:20 pm


Postby papa1983 » Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:50 pm

You're gonna have to give me sources for the american soldiers walking towards an atomic explosion, and for the interview of an american biologist women giving babys radioactive iodine or I'm going to have to remain sceptical of those inflamatory claims.

Tests are done on primates all the time, not that I agree with that sort of thing.
The man of science has learned to believe in justification, not by faith, but by verification.
Thomas H. Huxley (1825-95) English biologist.
User avatar
papa1983
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:29 pm
Location: Afghanistan

Postby papa1983 » Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:23 pm

I'm going to accept that analogy only because it is from your point of view and it makes sense to you.

I was once a believer. My illustration is somewhat opposite. The believer being stuck in a world of their own creation. And the nonbeliever seeing the world as it really is.

Once I had come to the conclusion that god probably does not exist, the world I had known dissolved and became much bigger. I was able to think for myself rather than being told what to believe. No more heaven and hell, angels or demons.
The man of science has learned to believe in justification, not by faith, but by verification.
Thomas H. Huxley (1825-95) English biologist.
User avatar
papa1983
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:29 pm
Location: Afghanistan

Postby gamila » Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:30 pm

You're gonna have to give me sources for the american soldiers walking towards an atomic explosion, and for the interview of an american biologist women giving babys radioactive iodine or I'm going to have to remain sceptical of those inflamatory claims.


they where on tv documentaries
perhaps some youtube fanatics can give you some clips

try this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_we ... ted_States
There were also instances during the nuclear testing program in which soldiers were exposed to overly high levels of radiation, which grew into a major .

and this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_radi ... xperiments
Radioactive Iodine Experiments; 1.2 Uranium Experiments ... a study to discover if radioactive iodine affected premature babies differently from full-term babies. ... above that of the military Commander of Operation Castle. ... Such tests had dispersed radioactive contamination worldwide, ..
gamila
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:20 pm

Postby papa1983 » Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:12 pm

They didn't have amercian soldiers walking towards the tests. These soldiers were exposed to the fallout just like much of the general population close to these site. A very bad thing, I agree.

Radioactive experiments to human patients without their knowledge or consent is completely unethical.

Science is neutral. Scientists can be however they wish.
The man of science has learned to believe in justification, not by faith, but by verification.
Thomas H. Huxley (1825-95) English biologist.
User avatar
papa1983
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:29 pm
Location: Afghanistan

Postby gamila » Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:21 pm

Science is neutral. Scientists can be however they wish

science is a human activity and as such it is not neutral
with out scientists there would be no science
science is a human activity
a definition of science is

http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/scienc ... ition.html
"knowledge attained through study or practice," or "knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world.


what is investigated
how it is investigated
how it is used
how it is tested
is all based on a human descion and
thus
science cannot be neutral- as it is done by humans
as such it is a political/ethical decision
gamila
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:20 pm

Re: Science as a pathogen

Postby telanerv » Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:38 pm

science has cured disease and created the food that the farmers grew that your parents ate to create you, gamila. you would not exist otherwise. read about the green revolution

people who spread disinformation are the equivalent of people who burn books or publish incorrect history books

people who post as gamila are the internet equivalent of the crazy's on the streetcorner passing out pamphlets that will save your immortal soul, or something :lol:
telanerv
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:53 pm

Re: Religion as a pathogen

Postby AFJ » Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:05 am

I guess my understanding of what people call "religion" is different. It is more relationship than religion. The inferences I get from agnostics about religion is like its a bunch of rules without any heart or Spirit. Even the Bible says "the law kills, but the spirit gives life..." I can then understand the disappointment or disillusionment with what then become only a bunch of dogmatic ceremonies, songs, and "hogwash."

It would be like being in a marriage where I never spent any time with my wife, or where there was no love I would want out.

Love is a motivation that incidentally can not be proven scientifically nor does it have a place to be defined in science, but it is nonetheless commonly experienced by many people. I guess perhaps in relation to science at least it is comparable to "religion" or "spirituality."
AFJ
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:59 pm

Postby gamila » Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:31 am

I suppose there might be something to a certain personality type being attracted to anything predominantly metaphysical.


There does seem to be certain people who are more prone to accept religion


the same could be said for science
ie
There does seem to be certain people who are more prone to accept science

science has caused deaths
we have those narzi scientists and their variants in democracies - just read about how the americans tested some of their atom bombs
or how scientists put radioactive iodine in babies milk to see the effect on babies

just as a certain pathogen type is attracted to religion
certain human pathogen types are attracted to science

both religion and science have untold deaths on it bloody hands
ie in the name of religion
and we here these days
in the name of research
we have psychologist helping with toruyure
gamila
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:20 pm

Re: Religion as a pathogen

Postby AFJ » Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:40 pm

Concerning the religion/science debate.

1) First of all, both realms contain people who make moral decisions and some of them are harmful or done in ignorance of the consequences. I would say that the general intentions of science and at least a majority of religions is for the benefit of the human race.

2) The predominant area of conflict between religion and science systems (systems include the entire organization, people, and knowledge contained within each realm) is on the subject of origins i.e. evolution/biblical creation/intelligent design.

a) For instance, I have a geologist friend who worked many years for an oil company. His creationist interpretation of evidence did not hinder his ability to be a successful geologist. He could still work within the paradigm of the geologic timescale interpretation.

3) All other models that are in other fields of science (such as the collapsing nebulae theory in astro-physics) I should think could be worked though by those who do not personally accept it's principles.

4) There is much more in science than the issue of origins. And the personal beliefs of a science person would not interfere with their work.
AFJ
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:59 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Off Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron