1. Welcome to NoFap! We have disabled new forum accounts from being registered for the time being. In the meantime, you can join our weekly accountability groups.
    Dismiss Notice

For the science nerds!

Discussion in 'Off-topic Discussion' started by SolitaryScribe, Mar 24, 2018.

  1. SolitaryScribe

    SolitaryScribe Fapstronaut

    I found this awesome quote on Wikipedia by astronomer Robert Jastrow. I think it's a very interesting perspective he's taking considering he himself was an agnostic. Hope you guys enjoy:

    "Now we see how the astronomical evidence supports the Biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and Biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy."

    "There is a strange ring of feeling and emotion in these reactions [of scientists to evidence that the universe had a sudden beginning]. They come from the heart whereas you would expect the judgments to come from the brain. Why? I think part of the answer is that scientists cannot bear the thought of a natural phenomenon which cannot be explained, even with unlimited time and money. There is a kind of religion in science; it is the religion of a person who believes there is order and harmony in the Universe. Every event can be explained in a rational way as the product of some previous event; every effect must have its cause, there is no First Cause. … This religious faith of the scientist is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a product of forces or circumstances we cannot discover. When that happens, the scientist has lost control. If he really examined the implications, he would be traumatized."

    "Consider the enormity of the problem. Science has proved that the universe exploded into being at a certain moment. It asks: What cause produced this effect? Who or what put the matter or energy into the universe? And science cannot answer these questions, because, according to the astronomers, in the first moments of its existence the Universe was compressed to an extraordinary degree, and consumed by the heat of a fire beyond human imagination. The shock of that instant must have destroyed every particle of evidence that could have yielded a clue to the cause of the great explosion."

    "For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountain of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."

    Scientists have no proof that life was not the result of an act of creation, but they are driven by the nature of their profession to seek explanations for the origin of life that lie within the boundaries of natural law.

    — Robert Jastrow, The Enchanted Loom: Mind in the Universe, (1981), p. 19.
     
    Millenial and MLMVSS like this.
  2. so what am I supposed to do with this, being a science nerd?

    start praying?
    finally accepting that god exists?
    or that theologists have known the most fundamental things about the universe in the first place?

    science produces knowledge, we use it to do things, end of story. for the hard sciences it doesn't matter if you believe in god or not. you observe things and try to get the rules of why things behave in the way they do, to predict behaviour. it makes us fly, type, play videogames, have electrical power and so forth, what does adding god into that help us with?

    i'm basically just writing this because you made me read a text, that is absolutely no news to me, a viewpoint well known, probably resulting in a discussion that is held every hour on this platform for years, with nothing changing whatsoever, but people talking about things that will not affect them in any way.
     
  3. MLMVSS

    MLMVSS Fapstronaut

    611
    7,572
    123
    I specifically like this part of the text. It's easy for scientists to say the universe began with the Big Bang due to the effects it apparently left behind, such as the cosmic radiation background and red/blue shifts in galaxies. However, these only show effects and not the actual process itself. Science has never tested the Big Bang before, as it's obviously outside their power, so it leaves out a huge component of the Scientific Method.

    Now, does that mean it's fake? Maybe, maybe not. But, too many take the Big Bang as a proven fact rather than a theory or even a hypothesis, when scientists only studied its supposed effects.

    Religious stories of creation are similar. Although we didn't witness it, we claim there are effects of such a process (some we can see, others we can't), yet this belief is ridiculed in the science community, despite them also having a hypothesis.

    To me, the Big Bang's hard to believe. Contrary to popular belief, the theory states that it didn't occur in any specific place, but in every available space possible at the same time (as it was space itself expanding, not matter spewing into empty space). Which... Doesn't make much sense for something to spontaneously occur in those circumstances.

    At times, science takes as much faith as religion does, perhaps even more for some.
     
  4. Supermarron

    Supermarron Fapstronaut

    248
    248
    63
    Science is a strictly logical field of philosophy used to improve human welfare. Unless there is a hard proof of whatever that can’t be proven in science world it is not considered a fact but a temporary hypothesis unless that hypothesis such as Big Bang is observed in different universe from ours.
     
  5. SolitaryScribe

    SolitaryScribe Fapstronaut

    Reason I'm sharing this information because I want people t discuss the philosophy of scientific discovery, and talk about the harmony between the scientific perspective and religious perspective.

    These are all products of what science can give us, but they themselves are not science or rather have nothing to do with the philosophy of science.

    I'm not trying to change your mind about anything... mind you your not the only person on this site, there are people on here who may find the post interesting. If the post doesn't mean anything to you, than by all means just ignore it.
     
  6. IggyIshness

    IggyIshness Fapstronaut

    2,294
    1,258
    143
    ..that doesnt mean god is real?
     

Share This Page