When Science met God

[The Guid]

BBC Magazine, when Science met God

Thought this might be of interest to some people here.

[Winston Blake]

For some scientists, this belief - and I deliberately call it that - has some consolations of religion. It attempts to make sense of every corner of existence and of our place within all that exists.

Belief? The whole idea of good science is that you don't believe in anything, you just go with the best you've got so far and keep questioning and improving.

Scientists tend to build a reputation on refuting the theories of those who have gone before.

Actually, that should be 'expanding' not 'refuting', theories don't get killed off by new ones, they're just generalised. Refuting only takes place at the cutting edge after conclusive evidence arrives for competing theories' predictions.

Some ideas endured and the most enduring is the idea of a supernatural dimension to our existence. I call it the "Divine Idea".

Why not just 'supernaturalism'? He continues to use 'the Divine Idea' and 'the divine', arguably implying monotheism.

For some people, the very fact that the "idea of God" has survived is proof enough of God's reality. But it is a simplistic theory; things survive for all sorts of random reasons.

Actually, it's not a theory at all, and using the term 'theory' in something titled 'When science meets God' means this being in the colloquial sense is unlikely.

They are both essentially two different ways of looking at the natural world, though each gives an important insight into the other.

Sure, religion gives important insights into mythology, human history, psychology, etc. It doesn't give such insights into the nature of the natural world.

how I continue to attempt to resolve that conflict, as an averagely rational scientists and a Jew will be of some interest.

[nitpick mode brakes squealing] 'Scientists' is a typo.

...and what will the first comment be? How about a self-proclaimed 'logical proof' that God exists:

Dear Winston, To sum up, you basically claim that God only really exists in our imagination to provide us with the basis for reality. It's a fair comment, but seeing it all from a logical point of view your argument fails, as below. Using normal common sense I cannot even fathom the odds of how from the big bang (perhaps 'Big Joke'), could produce "everything" so complex and intricately interlaced. Human knowledge still cannot fathom the deepest scientific mysteries, then what about the many paranormal happening (life in other dimensions perhaps?). There's all the proof of intelligent design that you need, so logically I'll lay odds of almost infinity that God exists.

[Lord Zentei]

Streams of non-sequiturs and sophistry. These columns seem to get more and more insipid. And the comments selected by the BBC editorial staff are, as ever, insipid also.

[Morilore]

The only two interesting parts:

If you look carefully, you might see one of those slim, elongated boxes attached to the front doorpost of one of the houses near you. They appear on houses across the world - wherever Jews have lived.

The box contains a tightly rolled parchment on which a qualified scribe will have written Hebrew letters in special ink.

The text contains a commandment from Deuteronomy to attach a sign to all doorposts of your house.

From primitive beginnings around the world to the present day the understanding of why we worship God or it is becoming more apparent. We are God or it. We created God or it. We are that entity. We, as a whole will attempt to spread ourselves and our beliefs beyond the boundaries of this Earth, which has also become God or it, to wherever God or it takes us so we may create an even bigger God - soul or IT - information technology.

[Morilore]

Ghetto edit: that second one was a comment, not in the actual article.

[Molyneux]

The only two interesting parts:

If you look carefully, you might see one of those slim, elongated boxes attached to the front doorpost of one of the houses near you. They appear on houses across the world - wherever Jews have lived.

The box contains a tightly rolled parchment on which a qualified scribe will have written Hebrew letters in special ink.

The text contains a commandment from Deuteronomy to attach a sign to all doorposts of your house.

Mezuzahs are odd...but nice, and they don't only contain the commandment to attach a sign. That's just part of the passage.

Now tefillin, on the other hand, are just plain strange.

[Saurencaerthai]

Now tefillin, on the other hand, are just plain strange.

They've actually got a good deal of symbolism built into them.

[Molyneux]

Now tefillin, on the other hand, are just plain strange.

They've actually got a good deal of symbolism built into them.

Symbolism or not, they are weird-looking, and uncomfortable to wear.

[Kettch]

Scientists tend to build a reputation on refuting the theories of those who have gone before.

Actually, that should be 'expanding' not 'refuting', theories don't get killed off by new ones, they're just generalised. Refuting only takes place at the cutting edge after conclusive evidence arrives for competing theories' predictions.

In physics or chemestry your response is very true, but the author's perspective is as a 'medical scientist.' In physics if something makes it to theory stage & later is superceeded, it is usually found to have been a special case. On the other hand in medicine there is alot more refuting going around, for example the capabilities of Vitamin C, or Ulcers's cause being an infection & not stress.

[wolveraptor]

Those commie bastards didn't post my blurb. Damn them!