Why are people overly reliant on science?
We know it is limited, we know it can't explain simple human issues like love, hate, fear, hope....
Why is there this overriding desperate need for things to fit within the realm of science?
Is the desperation to have everything explainable the cause or is it the desperation for their not to be a creator the cause.
(side note: anyone who tries to tell me love is a chemical reaction in the brain will be laughed off the bus)
you confusing the physical reaction to the emotion with the emotion
- NousLv 77 years agoFavorite Answer
They are not!
Why are BAD Christians so afraid of it?!
The Pope, Catholic Church, Church of England and mainstream churches all accept the big bang and evolution!
Lord Carey the former Archbishop of Canterbury put it rather well – “Creationism is the fruit of a fundamentalist approach to scripture, ignoring scholarship and critical learning, and confusing different understandings of truth”!
Nice that Christians and atheists can agree and laugh together even if it is at fundie expense!
But behind the laughter is the despair at the fundamentalists striving so hard to destroy Christianity by turning it from a religion to an ideology!
Surveys suggest that 29% of American Christians are so extremist in their beliefs that they fall well outside of the accepted bounds of Christianity!
- Anonymous7 years ago
"Why are people overly reliant on science?"
Science explains the world around us.
Scientists try to solve some of our problems.... eg cancer.
Tell me, if you get sick do you take advantage of Modern Medicine or...
Do you still rely on the local Witch Doctor doing spells on you?
"We know it is limited"
Well of course it is - it's limited by our knowledge.
We know MUCH more now than a hundred years ago.
Scientists have developed vaccines against diseases your forebears suffered.
"we know it can't explain simple human issues like love, hate, fear, hope...."
Well it can but you wouldn't understand it...
Because GODDIDIT is NOT scientific.
"Why is there this overriding desperate need for things to fit within the realm of science?"
I didn't realise there was any desperation involved although I'm sure there are parents who would love science to solve the medical issues challenging their children.
Apparently prayer hasn't worked.
"Is the desperation to have everything explainable the cause or is it the desperation for their not to be a creator the cause."
What makes you think there's a creator of all this?
Because you don't understand and GODDIDIT is easy for the simple mind to grasp?
"anyone who tries to tell me love is a chemical reaction in the brain will be laughed off the bus)"
Because GODDIDIT, yeah?
Do you know how many people are Pointing and Larfing at you?
"Religion is backward, primitive, retarded and ignorant, and it makes people think, talk and act, backward, primitive, retarded and ignorant!"
“If energy can’t be destroyed or created, then god can't create it now can he?
If the universe requires a creator, then so too does god.
Who created god?
If god could have always existed, then so too could the universe.
Just cos you can't grasp it doesn’t mean GODDIDIT, it just means you're stupid.”
God is imaginary… http://godisimaginary.com/
- Jim VLv 77 years ago
I'm not sure I agree with the premise.
I don't think it is science that is the problem, but naturalism. Science is the study of the natural world. Many of the first scientists were theists. Many contemporary scientists are theists.
Naturalists/materialists rely on science to "prove" their points because science is approached with the view of methodological naturalism, meaning that the scientist investigates /assuming/ that all of the causes are naturalistic. Of course, after proceeding as such it is circular reasoning to come back and say that science disproves the super-natural.
Methodological naturalism is fine - until the researcher comes to a point of "first cause". At these intersections the natural finds its cause in the super-natural.
Some scientist come to this intersection so ingrained in the natural that any non-natural cause is simply cannot be considered.
"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."
~Richard Lewontin Harvard biologist and geneticist
Otherwise I have no problem with science itself, just some scientists. Since nature and revealed theology have the same author it is only logical that when both are understood correctly we will find not only compatibility, but a deeper appreciation and awe of the creator.
"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Romans 1:20
Where Science and Faith converge
- CarolynLv 44 years ago
I find such people irritating but partially right. Some forms of work may be hard, physically taxing, and often unpleasant because of it, but compared to sedentary jobs are healthy and might rightly give you a sense of achievement. Some might result in health problems because of the physical demands, but there are problems such as obesity related to jobs where you're sat at a desk all day, eye strain as well if it's with a computer in front of you. A good example is olive pickers in Greece compared to those with office jobs - one might have a more comfortable, much more well-paid job but I know whose body I'd rather have. You need more than physical reward and pride in your work though, and manual labour isn't paid for in full. Of course that's largely to do with immigrants working for much less, but it's certainly true that that side of the work sucks and to argue otherwise you must just like the cheap labour.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous7 years ago
Well, I'll probably get laughed at, but love appears to be a chemical reaction in the brain. How mere chemistry and matter could produce emotions and consciousness, I have no idea, nor does anyone else. But this appears to be the case. It also seems true that the love we have for others - a mother's love for her children - exist only because they were selected for by blind mechanical processes.
You are in good company if you find this to be a chilling prospect. Nobel-prize winning physicist Steven Weinberg wrote,
"Worse, the worldview of science is rather chilling. Not only do we not find any point to life laid out for us in nature, no objective basis for our moral principles, no correspondence between what we think is the moral law and the laws of nature, of the sort imagined by philosophers from Anaximander and Plato to Emerson. We even learn that the emotions that we most treasure, our love for our wives and husbands and children, are made possible by chemical processes in our brains that are what they are as a result of natural selection acting on chance mutations over millions of years. And yet we must not sink into nihilism or stifle our emotions. At our best we live on a knife-edge, between wishful thinking on one hand and, on the other, despair."
- Sans DeityLv 77 years ago
Well, what other method do you suggest one uses to discern reality from non-reality? The scientific method is the most consistenly reliable method we have devised of discerning fact from fiction.
Which is why when the doctor says he has to remove a tumor from your brain, you want him depending on science. Are you telling me that if there were no scientific evidence for your brain tumor and the doctor said "Don't worry, the Holy Spirit has told me where it is", that you would prefer he went on faith and not science?
Why is science good enough for you when it comes to proving brain tumors, or viruses, or the efficacy of surgical techniques, but it's not good enough when it comes to the existence of invisible wizards?
"You're confusing the physical reaction to the emotion with the emotion"
Um, what is an emotion but a physical reaction to stimuli? Thanks for making science's point.
- 7 years ago
First, your side note is stupid. It shows that even though you acknowledge that fact, you dismiss it down to your ignorance.
Second, as humans we evolved to learn about the universe around us. Instead of giving up hope when we didn't know something we continued to work and hack it until a solution was found.
Third, if this world was controlled by people by like, we'd still be in the stone age.
- 7 years ago
Its because they are natural man and can not comprehend beyond the realm of the natural. Because they can not sense that which is spirit with there 5 natural senses they are left dumbfounded in unbelief...
- Anonymous7 years ago
Why are people overly reliant on some nonexistent, invisible being in the sky?
- ♣ÇhÄøŠ♣Lv 77 years ago
Yeah, it can. Fear is an adrenaline response, happiness results from endorphins, etc.
This has been known for a very long time.