colonel@gloria.UUCP (George Sicherman) (11/11/84)
[Yuk! Why would you want to eat that?] > Science and religion are NOT in any way opposed to each other! The > scientific method can and should be applied to all religious activities, That would abuse the scientific method. The scientific method applies only to _repeatable_ phenomena, not to things like your birth, life, and death. Most unmechanized cultures have _no_ use for the scientific method of experimentation and analysis, because in unmechanized cultures virtually nothing is precisely repeatable. -- Col. G. L. Sicherman ...seismo!rochester!rocksanne!rocksvax!sunybcs!gloria!colonel
tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (11/28/84)
> > Science and religion are NOT in any way opposed to each other! The > > scientific method can and should be applied to all religious activities, > > That would abuse the scientific method. The scientific method applies > only to _repeatable_ phenomena, not to things like your birth, life, and > death. Most unmechanized cultures have _no_ use for the scientific > method of experimentation and analysis, because in unmechanized cultures > virtually nothing is precisely repeatable. What does lack of mechanization have to do with it? And why do you assume that religion must deal only with unrepeatable phenomena? It should be a way to discover how humans are constituted and how they work optimally. It should open minds, not close them by providing "orders from above" concerning what to believe. If a religion's benefits are not reproducible, that religion is a fraud. You can only waste your time through membership. -- Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University Computation Center ARPA: Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K uucp: seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim (supposedly) "Remember all ye that existence is pure joy; that all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass & are done; but there is that which remains." Liber AL, II:9.
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (11/29/84)
In article <20980005@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) writes: >If a religion's benefits are not reproducible, that religion is a fraud. >You can only waste your time through membership. I suppose this means that Judaism is a fraud, because God chose to part the Sea of Reeds only once. It seems rather presumptious to me to claim that God has to produce miracles on demand-- which is all Tim's statement amounts to. Since God is omnipotent, there is no reason to expect him to be bound to some sort of rule which can be modelled scientifically. I expect God to do lots of unreproducible things, unreproducible in the sense that we can't set up the proper situation and expect the miracle to be repeated. Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe
laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (12/03/84)
Unless I am misunderstanding what George Sicherman means by the scientific method, I think that his claims about non-mechanised society are incorrect. Among all peoples, even the most primitive ones, you will find a great deal of ritual associated with ``important events'' usually connected together by religion. Rituals are expected to produce results. Dancing naked in the fields really is supposed to make the crops grow better. Pouring water on the ground really is supposed to make it rain. Bloody sacrifices really are supposed to make the gods act more in your favour. And so on. It is not the case that any village shaman makes up a new ritual on the spur of the moment for any occasion -- that is why they have to serve an apprenticeship under another shaman -- to learn the old rituals. Primitive man may not have been particularily scrupulous about isolating all of the independent variables in his experiments to change his environment through magic, but I don't think he was ignorant of the scientific method. After all, a lot of the working magic is now called ``medicine'' but still works pretty well the same way ``eat this herb and you'll feel better''. laura creighton utzoo!laura
tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (12/10/84)
> In article <20980005@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) writes: > > >If a religion's benefits are not reproducible, that religion is a fraud. > >You can only waste your time through membership. > > I suppose this means that Judaism is a fraud, because God chose to part the > Sea of Reeds only once. It seems rather presumptious to me to claim that > God has to produce miracles on demand-- which is all Tim's statement amounts > to. Since God is omnipotent, there is no reason to expect him to be bound > to some sort of rule which can be modelled scientifically. I expect God > to do lots of unreproducible things, unreproducible in the sense that we > can't set up the proper situation and expect the miracle to be repeated. > > Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe In Judaism, the parting of the sea of reeds is typically considered a metaphor with multiple levels of meaning, which may or may not correspond to a historical event. If someone claimed that Judaism conferred the benefit that water would move out of your way when you had to get away from someone then, yes, I would call that person a fraud. Judaism is, as I understand it, supposedly the best way for a Jew to live. It is up to each person doing the experiment to verify whether this is true. I have not lived as a Jew nor am I Jewish, so I do not know. I do know that I consider the Noachian law to contain tribal prejudices which are inaccurate, particularly the prohibition of polytheism. (However, I don't think Charles was really very concerned with my answer; the message smacks more of an attempt to discredit me by insinuating a form of anti-Semitism. Why Judaism in particular?) If a religion claims that God will intervene in a variety of ways which cannot be predicted to the benefit of the worshipper, and that does not happen, then the religion is a fraud. These tests are not hard to perform if you are really unbiased about the issue, but impossible if you want to believe one way or the other. For instance, I was initiated into the O.T.O. when I was 18; since then, my salary and lifestyle have improved to a truly absurd extent. I do not attribute this to my initiation, but if I had been "born again" instead of initiated, a lot of people (praticularly on TV) would be urging me to consider the lifestyle improvement a gift from God. Wishful thinking is anathema to science. -=- Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University Computation Center ARPA: Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K uucp: seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim CompuServe: 74176,1360 audio: shout "Hey, Tim!" "Remember all ye that existence is pure joy; that all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass & are done; but there is that which remains." Liber AL, II:9.
tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (12/11/84)
Thank you, Charles, for completely failing to refer to any of my points in your supposed refutation. I was afraid we would be stuck with rational argument here. -=- Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University Computation Center ARPA: Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K uucp: seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim CompuServe: 74176,1360 audio: shout "Hey, Tim!" "Remember all ye that existence is pure joy; that all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass & are done; but there is that which remains." Liber AL, II:9.
dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (12/11/84)
> > In article <20980005@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) writes: > > > > >If a religion's benefits are not reproducible, that religion is a fraud. > > >You can only waste your time through membership. > > > > I suppose this means that Judaism is a fraud, because God chose to part the > > Sea of Reeds only once. It seems rather presumptious to me to claim that > > God has to produce miracles on demand-- which is all Tim's statement amounts > > to. Since God is omnipotent, there is no reason to expect him to be bound > > to some sort of rule which can be modelled scientifically. I expect God > > to do lots of unreproducible things, unreproducible in the sense that we > > can't set up the proper situation and expect the miracle to be repeated. > > > > Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe > > In Judaism, the parting of the sea of reeds is typically considered a > metaphor with multiple levels of meaning, which may or may not correspond to > a historical event. > [Tim Maroney] Well, I know I'm not the greatest Jewish scholar in the world (esp. since not Jewish), but I've never read any Judaic literature suggesting something like this. Documentation? -- Paul DuBois {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois "I will sing unto the Lord as long as I live: I will sing praise to my God while I have my being." Psalm 104:33
jnelson@trwrba.UUCP (John T. Nelson) (12/13/84)
Rituals are also used simply to remember, or as an expression of what one feels. - John