Science Or Spirituality

[GMBlazed 0]

Ok but that is not the only theory of evolution. I agree with evolution, but not the fact that we came from monkeys but the fact that our minds have developed. There is no way I can believe in Christian s*&^

[snowisawsome 0]

I believe that evolution did happen as there is significant evidence to support it. I also believe that all other scientific theories are acurate. At the same time I do not see why this has to conflict with religion. I believe that the bible is open to interpretation rather than designed for literal meaning. This does not mean that any other view is wrong, as it is only my opinion. I agree with most of the people who have spoken about this previously in that everyone should find their own answer between spirituality and religion and how they mesh with an open mind to all possiblities.

Additionally, I thought I should mention how much I completely agree with this:

For me, it isn't one or the other. For me, they're the same. Science explains the world around us. Or at least attempts to. Spirituality is an attempt to explain the world around us. most the time these two approaches (science and spirituality) are contradictive and against one another. But for me, they complement each other.

[wingman23 0]

Mmmmm, tricky one this,i am spiritual in nature, so dont really have a god belief, more of a returning to the light of spirit when we die, science too is a very closed minded shop. if they cant prove it, then it doesnt exsist, it never enters their heads at all that the reason they cant prove spirit (for instance) is not because it doesnt exsist, but because science hasnt the tools yet to probe the other side. Now im sure we have all heard of stephen Hawkins, and i found it very interesting when asked if he believed in god, that he didnt say no he didnt as you would have expected a man of such a great mind to belive, or not believe as the case may be. Maybe he was just edging his bets a bit, but to me it sounded as if he did believe in god,or at least something after we die, as he for one will know, like a poster on here said already, that we are made up of energy, and energy can never be destroyed, it just takes on a different form. For those who follow the religous path, then that is all about faith, you believe without seeing, perhaps the evolution theory is all about god testing how strong our faith really is. Faith isnt about things being made easy for us to believe, faith is about believing agaisnt all the odds

Edited December 2, 2008 by wingman23 (see edit history)

[Misanthrope 0]

I?ve long taken issue with the authorized platform perpetuating this manufactured chasm between physical and metaphysical sciences. Study of Spirit is also legitimate science, you see. We have merely been cut off from our source. And not by accident. A wall of ignorance has been constructed and readily swallowed by the masses, but its foundations are built on propaganda, pseudo science, and outright lies. So I?m not sure how one with even a limited grasp of the matter can propose spirit and matter are somehow mutually exclusive. Something is indeed ?out there,? or to be more to the point, ?in there.? Not that I?m a fan of the man who took credit for the Theory of Relativity, but in his later years, the name most synonymous with the sciences (Einstein), had to admit there is something, something indefinable guiding all matter. You cannot have one without the other, at least on this plane of existence where spirit is forced to endure the hell of physicality. And yet the status quo that strives to separate man from his inner (higher) nature would have you believe man evolved from apes, and leave it at that. And we are the poorer for it.

[mbafactory 0]

The theory of Darwin is a possibility, and theory of God is belief. We can not be sure of origin of life with these two theories..we will have to consider many other options as well. The origin must have been a complex reaction which created the first primitive microscopic forms of life and after that it was a process of evolution, which brought the present life forms into existance after a gradual development.

[surbjit 0]

Well people who are deeply religios believe that the earth was created by god. But there are however some people that believe the earth was made by science. There is nothing wrong between the two everyone has there opinions.But i think the earth was created by Darwins theory as there is some significant evidence to back it up.

[y4nzi 0]

Interesting question, and a difficult one to answer. I like the idea of spirituality because it is a bit more open minded than science. Ultimately I agree that both science and spirituality are ways to attempt to explain the world around us.The problem with science is that it's so black and white, if numbers, graphs, data, research, or our own eyes don't prove something, then it is wrong, nonexistent etc. Spirituality on the other hand can take things a bit too far to the point where I don't believe some of the concepts and beliefs being thrown around. In the end it's a balance between the two that varies for each individual, I think i classify myself as a fence sitter, believing in a bit of both. Some may have more faith in spirituality than science whilst for others it may be the other way round.Either way I think both need to exist to compliment each other...

[mahesh2k 0]

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed - proved.

Proved? How can you say that this should apply to whole universe or even another solar system? How many solar system are capable for habitat by humans. 99% accuracy is there but we can't say that t should be applicable for whole universe. It is like assuming life on another solar system will need oxygen to breath.

Any part of you when cut off from your body (which is said "dead") is NON-LIVING.

Agree. But can you call beans and fruit nuts as living beings? They can be used to create living plant seven if you keep it for more than 6-months or so. So Define Life in this case? Can your spirituality defines life in case of plants? or you mean plants can keep themselves dead for months and then rise as phoenix after that ?

So you are basically made up of ATOMS or MOLECULES which are defined as NON-LIVING Matter (which is nothing but energy : e=mc2)Then where did the LIFE come from?

If we are made up of NON-living matter then creationism concept fails right here and there is no need of explaining life in terms of science. Consider it as Abstract/non-procedural system which evolves by taking help of matter available to it.

And if an ENTITY called LIFE exists and IT makes non-living things move, grow and reproduce.. Why are we even defining criteria for life ? (eg. we say, life needs air for breathing..)Let science define LIFE first. :-)

ENTITY? Can you elaborate on that please. You mean,Without Living beings there is no change in those things which are non-living?lol In that case, you're objecting evolution theory which even you can't justify with any spiritual concept. There are some planets which are without any living being or that ENTITY. Take case of Moon. Do you see any life over there? or any Higher being ENTITY? But it still exist and gravity, rocks and sand still exists there and they do degrade due to climatic changes. So, Let spirituality define ENTITY first

[Diffusr 0]

Quantum theory has come full circle all the way round to ancient original Buddhist teachings that the Universe is created by consciousness. All atoms are infinite fields of potential spread out over a vast area which is probably infinite. It is only when consciousness enters and observes the atom that it instantaneously collapses into the physical "thing" that it is. This is happening constantly and only ever in this very moment. The Universe is really just a soup of energy out of which your mind then creates whatever it wants, including all laws of physics, history, religions, everything all in THIS moment.The Adam and Eve, Heaven and Hell, God up there people down here story is about 6000 years out of date.Quantum physics is a consciousness update and reboot.Get with the programme.

[mahesh2k 0]

Quantum theory has come full circle all the way round to ancient original Buddhist teachings that the Universe is created by consciousness. All atoms are infinite fields of potential spread out over a vast area which is probably infinite.

Yes. quantum theory do talk about consciousness. But some people think that consciousness means that ENTITY. which is vague reasoning in my opinion cause if atoms are conscious because of ENTITY then it open many questions which comes under pseudo science. And spirituality tries to counter that in it's favor by objecting on evolution theory and atomic theory.

[krishnadeep1 0]

Since the question is, " which one do U believe? ", I would say I don't believe Darwin's theory. Scientists, except a rare few, somehow simply presume that all people who lived before them were fools and simply dumber and that humans grow to become smarter and smarter as time goes on. Well, it doesn't work like that! As for the other option I have about God, He is everything and everywhere and He made Darwin too! I bet there have been people like him ages before all of us were there to talk about Darwin on this planet!The thing which is needed these days is not Spirituality or Science, it is Spirituality AND Science. If we only begin to bridge the gap that is separating these, then mankind would be at more peace. Have you seen the movie Angels and Demons? It says the exact same thing. It's about time we stopped messing with ourselves and start seeking answers within ourselves. I mean, when you can eat a mango and be happy about it, why go stand on a mountain and ask how many others ate a mango, how much more tastier theirs was and so on? I am not advocating complacency here, but contentment and common sense. Cheers!

[mahesh2k 0]

Since the question is, " which one do U believe? ", I would say I don't believe Darwin's theory. Scientists, except a rare few, somehow simply presume that all people who lived before them were fools and simply dumber and that humans grow to become smarter and smarter as time goes on. Well, it doesn't work like that!

Whether you believe or not doesn't change the facts that there are more evidences in evolution. Evolution has more facts than whatever fantasy of spirituality you believe in. For starters take a look at this site. In short, Evolution has more evidence than Creationism. And whatever claims of creationism are made by religious people and spiritualists is taken as pseudo-science(ref:NCSE) when they make comment against evolution.

As for the other option I have about God, He is everything and everywhere and He made Darwin too! I bet there have been people like him ages before all of us were there to talk about Darwin on this planet!

So ? Many god believers accept evolution. Even Christianity recently agreed to it. Problem with spiritualists is they can't prove a inch in their pseudo-science and try to pretend they know it all. in fact, they can't even give empirical evidence to their own claims. All word salad and no substance.

The thing which is needed these days is not Spirituality or Science, it is Spirituality AND Science.

I call this escapism. People live without spirituality but can't without science(it is broad term-even exploring for answers is infact science in itself. if you can live without science then start asking question why you need electricity, internet and so on, replace it with spiritual equivalent things). Spirituality is hyped and people preaching it are desperate to add it with science in order to get their fantasy claims approved.

If we only begin to bridge the gap that is separating these, then mankind would be at more peace.

Only skeptical view and understanding opponents view gives peace. Any attempt to suppress any side gives imbalance. Some people enjoy rational and reasonable life with science and some people live with fantasy stories of spirituality. As "Carol tavris" said in her book

Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts

, let people stick to their own opinion, instead of forcing others opinion or ideology on them. If spirituality is forced then there is definitely imbalance cause people are mixing pseudo-concepts of spirituality with science.

Have you seen the movie Angels and Demons? It says the exact same thing.It's about time we stopped messing with ourselves and start seeking answers within ourselves.

That is the skepticism. Instead of attributing unknown things to someone and creating theories based on that it is always better to be skeptical and in search of empirical evidence.

[truefusion 3]

Whether you believe or not doesn't change the facts that there are more evidences in evolution. Evolution has more facts than whatever fantasy of spirituality you believe in. For starters take a look at this site. In short, Evolution has more evidence than Creationism. And whatever claims of creationism are made by religious people and spiritualists is taken as pseudo-science(ref:NCSE) when they make comment against evolution.

I'm not sure if you noticed, but the only difference between Creationism and the theory of evolution is that one claims separate creations while the other claims common ancestry.

So ? Many god believers accept evolution. Even Christianity recently agreed to it. Problem with spiritualists is they can't prove a inch in their pseudo-science and try to pretend they know it all. in fact, they can't even give empirical evidence to their own claims. All word salad and no substance.

Don't equate minority with majority. Likewise, it is not necessarily the case that no evidence was provided, but rather when an alternative is provided, the search for truth no longer remains the objective from those who hold science as a shield.

I call this escapism. People live without spirituality but can't without science(it is broad term-even exploring for answers is infact science in itself. if you can live without science then start asking question why you need electricity, internet and so on, replace it with spiritual equivalent things). Spirituality is hyped and people preaching it are desperate to add it with science in order to get their fantasy claims approved.

If all science is in this case is today's technology, then i wonder how we've managed without it for thousands of years. Ironically, no matter how much one can achieve with science, man still constantly seeks to fill a void that cannot be filled with materials.

Only skeptical view and understanding opponents view gives peace. Any attempt to suppress any side gives imbalance. Some people enjoy rational and reasonable life with science and some people live with fantasy stories of spirituality. As "Carol tavris" said in her book , let people stick to their own opinion, instead of forcing others opinion or ideology on them. If spirituality is forced then there is definitely imbalance cause people are mixing pseudo-concepts of spirituality with science.

You cannot be understanding if you maintain skepticism—both act against each other. It is a common misconception to believe that spirituality and science cannot mix. Indeed, it is not that they don't mix but, rather, you don't want them to mix—that is the key point. Once you can differentiate between your desires and reality, you will understand why it is a misconception to believe that spirituality and science can't mix. Of course you would not favor both equally, hence why you place things that have a spiritual nature below, claiming imbalance. The imbalance is not within reality but within you.

That is the skepticism. Instead of attributing unknown things to someone and creating theories based on that it is always better to be skeptical and in search of empirical evidence.

It is impossible to be wholly skeptical, as you would in turn have to deny the "empirical evidence" in front of you. In order to accept anything, you would have to cease being skeptical. Therefore you cannot have both; the search for truth requires leaving skepticism behind if you ever seek to find an end to your search.

[krishnadeep1 0]

@mahesh2k: could you give evidence for love in your heart? could you give evidence to pain? could you give evidence to feelings deep within you? could you even give evidence and a complete reason for your existence? if science has a way for mankind to be happy under all circumstances and can give a reason for consciousness, howcome it hasn't put it out yet? science has given only things so far. technology gave even more things. things make you happy. thats' how most people think and live. but unbeknownst to perhaps your own self, scientists are moving away from "all is matter" and "matter creates energy" to "energy creates matter" and "all is energy". whoever said spirituality doesn't have evidence? do people like you have the patience to check it out? have you ever had the seriousness to ponder deeply at what things really are? word salad is science. how many people read scientific journals? hardly few! and your point about why spiritualists need internet, etc. doesn't make sense because spirituality, by it's definition, is the science of the SPIRIT...if you think that consciousness is product of brain activity, if you believe what DeCartes said about " I think ,therefore I am!", then ponder this: what gives you the power to realize that you are thinking in the first place? do you really think that your consciousness if your own? if so, could you give a scientific, empirical evidence of it's creation? could you give a practical, lay man term sense answer to what would be the end of consciousness? would you consciously be able to put an end or destroy consciousness? because according to your theories of evolution, everything is pointless, mindless existence that goes on between two points of time. well then, there's gotta be a beginning and an end! prove the beginnings and endings of consciousness! you very well can't because consciousness is not your own to do so.every human on this planet is driven by two basic desires: to avoid pain and to gain happiness/joy/peace. show me but one single person who WANTS pain with all his life. you cannot! it's simply not built into the fabric of our existence. the science of spirituality begins with these two desires and taking them to the next level where deeper questions are asked and answered. i stand by what i said earlier...science and spirituality are coming together and not away from each other. people like you who use words like skepticism, word salad, spiritual fantasies, escapism,etc. are simply finding within themselves that they have no real ground on which to prove their accusations. what is escapism? why do i need to learn to live the way you do? would you willingly live the life of a rapist, a drugs dealer or a murderer? i hope you would not! there is a way of living that is on a universal scale of good and bad. science cannot show people why to live, it can only show how. that is a very applaudable part of it. if a man is an atheist or a believer, he can go to a doctor and get healed. nobody is going to ask him about his inclinations or biases about science and spirituality- neither the doctor nor the medicine. similarly, there are universal truths that are rooted and your belief in them or your skepticism aren't simply going to change them. truth be told, science cannot mend broken hearts and desperate souls. you will know when life hits you hard and slaps you on the face every single moment of your life, asking you for an explanation of it's existence. since this is not happening, you wouldn't know. i've been where you are and i can answer many more of your questions. it's not a matter of belief,my friend. you can believe that electricity doesn't exist, go catch a live wire and die before you know it. it's not what science gives you as evidence either, because scientists too,are prone to error. you will have to realize that life is a series of awakenings to greater awareness and to the maturity that there are more people around you and the barriers of selfishness are put up simply so that they can be broken. i can understand every single word of what you wrote, because i am an engineer and i've been in similar spots as you are right now and your arguments are pretty good, but are not enought to answer THE question: give me a reason for human existence that makes sense and silences that bad boy who keeps slapping your face and asking you about it. if you think there's no reason and so on, well guess what, you're the escapist dear scientist! cheers and peace.

[mahesh2k 0]

I'm not sure if you noticed, but the only difference between Creationism and the theory of evolution is that one claims separate creations while the other claims common ancestry.

There are lot of differences if you're talking about creationism. Many of creationist push religious concepts in order to argue with evolution. This simply isn't going to work that way.

 

 

Don't equate minority with majority. Likewise, it is not necessarily the case that no evidence was provided, but rather when an alternative is provided, the search for truth no longer remains the objective from those who hold science as a shield.

Oh, now that if people starts to accept evolution, It goes into minority? and creationists are the one who use science to penetrate pseudo-holy concepts into schools. Finding gaps in science to push claims in holy books, spirituality won't make sense. It never made earlier nor it will make now. and debating people for the sake of preaching religion(that's what creationists do) is one such part i think people enjoy to suppress skepticism.

 

 

If all science is in this case is today's technology,then i wonder how we've managed without it for thousands of years.

 

is it ? what you call science ? isn't finding answers, skepticism part of science ? or you think humans survived earlier without this ? If you think so, then hats off to your this conclusion.

 

 

Ironically, no matter how much one can achieve with science, man still constantly seeks to fill a void that cannot be filled with materials.

I guess carol travis gave beautiful explanation in her book

Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts

. When people are convinced with what they call non-materialistic world they start rejecting reality(materialistic world). any argument in this is simply meant for taking down difference in opinion and as carol says, it won't make any difference to spiritualist people.

 

 

You cannot be understanding if you maintain skepticism—both act against each other. It is a common misconception to believe that spirituality and science cannot mix.

It is not misconception. Until and unless you can give me successful case in this i won't buy your claims for this. There are tons of claims made in this from many religions, spiritual cults like theiuba and their attempt to call it misconception never worked.

 

 

Indeed, it is not that they don't mix but, rather, you don't want them to mix—that is the key point.

Exactly. Hypothetical concepts in spirituality which is without proof makes no sense in reality. For example, there is no proof of spirit to begin with. And any attempt to defending spirituality is useless if one can't give empirical evidence for spirit. So what's the point in mixing it then ?

 

 

Once you can differentiate between your desires and reality, you will understand why it is a misconception to believe that spirituality and science can't mix.

Again, i found this as word play and not a provable way to understand hybridization of science and spirituality. If spirituality is that obvious then point of denial fades away, we shouldn't be discussing it at first place.

 

It is impossible to be wholly skeptical, as you would in turn have to deny the "empirical evidence" in front of you.

Not completely but i agree to this point that it is hard to be "wholly" skeptical. Thanks for pointing this out. I mean in order to hypothesize some theories in science, skepticism could turn off thinking process and may restrict some thoughts. But at the end, to make it work it needs to have "empirical evidence". Denying "empirical evidence" & suppressing skepticism is ignorance, and we know ignorance is bliss.