A New Faith and Science Forum

[JillSwift]

That's just it. Personal belief can be labeled as such, thus wouldn't be a claim, just a belief specific to that person's reckonings.

"I believe the universe is trying to kill me."

 

Leaving that a personal belief, what is there to discuss? It can be responded to: "I don't belive that the universe is trying to kill you." However, that's not discussion.

 

At best you get clusters of similar beliefs: "Oh, I believe the universe is out to kill me, too!"

 

Still, nothing is being discussed.

 

Until the belief is treated as a claim, then things can be discussed: "Why do you belief the universe is trying to kill you."

 

At which point there is either support in the form of evidence, or not. And given the nature of faith, there will be no support.

 

So again I'm led to the conclusion that a faith forum does not fit in here.

 

And again; there are gobs of forums out there who welcome discussions of faith.

[Baby Astronaut]

"I believe the universe is trying to kill me."

 

Leaving that a personal belief, what is there to discuss? It can be responded to: "I don't belive that the universe is trying to kill you." However, that's not discussion.

 

You sure it can't be made into a productive discussion? Let's see.

 

 

"I believe the universe is trying to kill me. Really sucks you know, having that feeling. There's no escaping it because no matter where I go, the freakin thing is already laying in wait for me. I think it's going to do it soon, just feels that way."

 

"

bummer dude. You should really get help.

"

 

"Didn't you understand? The "help" would still be part of the universe, and it wants to kill -- not help -- me.

 

"

well, I personally don't think the universe can kill anyone or is even conscious. Really, if the universe wanted you dead so bad it could just open a black hole inside of you or more simply just have prevented your birth in the first place. Ask yourself: does it really make sense? Unless you're having fun with us all...

"

 

"Maybe you have a poin---waaaait a minute, y--y--you're up to something, right? No good I bet...you're part of the universe and tricking me into letting my guard down. It won't happen! I'll not be such an easy lunch! You'll never see me posting here agaaaain!"

 

Dammit...you were right JillSwift.

 

 

So again I'm led to the conclusion that a faith forum does not fit in here.

 

And again; there are gobs of forums out there who welcome discussions of faith.

I totally agree with you, just being helpful towards the proposed idea.

[ydoaPs]

Those SFN members who are jonesing for some religion discussion can drop by my new forum.

[tar]

ydoaPs,

 

Thanks for the board. Looks like good idea. Probably see you there.

 

Regards, TAR

[truedeity]

There are many breeds of what you might call creationists.

 

You cant exactly categorize everybody at once without knowing intimately what their belief is on that topic.

 

I say, that if the God most creationists worship is real. Then he is a SOB! What kind of 'loving' creator would allow for torture, rape, genocide, etc.. etc..

 

My long tale of the creator/intellectual design concept is as follows...

 

The big bang happened. There were infinite possible universes all existing simultaneously. We are existing in one possible scenario instance universe. In another universe we don't exist. In-fact, there is no milky way.... But that's just 1 of infinite possibilities.

 

Somehow, consciousness becomes a property of the universe. And I believe one day science will proove this. Stuart Hammeroff is closer to proving this than anyone else that I know. http://truedeity.wordpress.com/2009/12/20/a-place-for-consciousness-in-nature-perspective-on-%E2%80%98conscious-events-as-orchestrated-space-time-selections%E2%80%99/

 

Over eons and eons of human belief, the cosmos started "Godding" somehow... Sort of like how thoughts create your reality type of thing....

 

And I believe we can speak scientifically about God in that aspect... Because now it's not about trying to disprove evolution. It's not about creationism. It's about science... Not God. And Not Religion.

[tomgwyther]

I have to agree with the 'No' camp here. this is after all, a science forum, in which we discuss science. To discuss religious matters; ydoaPs has a forum for this.

As mentioned earlier. nearly all science V Religion discussions end up with Catch-22, false dichotomy or screaming match situations.

Maybe a Philosophy sub-forum might work, but even that may not be immune to the afore mentioned problems.

Moreover, people from different cultural backgrounds would submit postings pre-equipped with certain biases and assumptions based on there personal cultural spiritual upbringing.

There are so many religions, Hindu, Jew, Christian, Muslim... there are about 4000 of them.

 

But there is only one science.

[ydoaPs]

But there is only one science.

 

You've obviously not seen 'Go God Go Part II'

[tomgwyther]

I've not seen 'go god go'. But just did a little wiki check-up.

It seems division into factions can happen in the absence of supernatural belief systems.

Keep evolutionary biologists away from Mrs. garrison and fat kids away from refrigerators eh!

[Genecks]

Could we at least keep the ethics and philosophy boards this time?

Please at least keep those.

[Phi for All]

Could we at least keep the ethics and philosophy boards this time?

Please at least keep those.

So far, all is going well, even with Religion. All we ever wanted was curious, courteous, enthusiastic discussions, and that's exactly what we're getting to date.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

And remember, it's up to you guys. If you don't make it hard on us to moderate, we'll keep the forums around. If Religion or Philosophy or whichever becomes a melee of anger, we're getting rid of it.

 

We can keep the good ones around, of course, but there's always some "leakage" between forums. We'll try our best to keep the forums civil.

[Severian]

So far, all is going well, even with Religion. All we ever wanted was curious, courteous, enthusiastic discussions, and that's exactly what we're getting to date.

 

In case you hadn't noticed, the reason the debate is "going well" is because only one side of the argument is being posted. Religious people are saying well away. You can't have mush "debate" with only one side of the argument.

 

But please do carry on with your circle jerk...

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

We haven't yet been trying to argue religion vs. non-religion, so it's more true that we simply haven't been hearing religious viewpoints on our topics. I would be very happy if we did.

 

Please, we're trying to make the new forums a place where anyone can have a civil discussion regardless of their religious status. At least wait for the forum to earn your disdain before you stay away.

 

I really don't want to end up with the "ARGH YOU'RE STUPID" attitude of the previous religion forum. Perhaps it'll work better this time.

[toastywombel]

In case you hadn't noticed, the reason the debate is "going well" is because only one side of the argument is being posted. Religious people are saying well away. You can't have mush "debate" with only one side of the argument.

 

But please do carry on with your circle jerk...

 

I somewhat agree, it is only going to be civil as long as there are not any 'actual' believers. I must admit I don't have much faith or see much use for a Religion Forum on SFN, but that just my opinion.

[Mr Skeptic]

Well, I'm an ex-actual-believer, and religion still interests my slightly. Certainly certain problems can be viewed from a religious perspective, and religious folks have had a good long time to think about a variety of problems. Perhaps we will also be able to get some better understanding between believers and atheists.

[StringJunky]

I somewhat agree, it is only going to be civil as long as there are not any 'actual' believers. I must admit I don't have much faith or see much use for a Religion Forum on SFN, but that just my opinion.

 

If you don't have a use for it...don't use it. Ignore it and let the people that do want that utility make use of it. It's not difficult.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

 

But please do carry on with your circle jerk...

 

They are not circle jerking..they are trying to lay good foundations by setting a good example on how it should be done.

[toastywombel]

If you don't have a use for it...don't use it. Ignore it and let the people that do want that utility make use of it. It's not difficult.

 

It is somewhat hard to ignore it for new members, or new readers, especially when the topics from the religion section are included on the featured posts on the front page. At least they could be omitted from the front page of the site like the politics section posts are.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Well, I'm an ex-actual-believer, and religion still interests my slightly. Certainly certain problems can be viewed from a religious perspective, and religious folks have had a good long time to think about a variety of problems. Perhaps we will also be able to get some better understanding between believers and atheists.

 

I doubt SFN will be able to bring 'better understanding' between these two parties when it seems like that has never truly happened on a grand scale ever. These sharp divides between beliefs and faiths have existed since the beginning of mankind, but SFN is going to help that?

[Sisyphus]

It is somewhat hard to ignore it for new members, or new readers, especially when the topics from the religion section are included on the featured posts on the front page. At least they could be omitted from the front page of the site like the politics section posts are.

 

This is actually a fair point. I'll bring it up.

 

I doubt SFN will be able to bring 'better understanding' between these two parties when it seems like that has never truly happened on a grand scale ever. These sharp divides between beliefs and faiths have existed since the beginning of mankind, but SFN is going to help that?

 

We're not aiming for a "grand scale," though. Conversations don't have to end all religious strife to be productive or interesting.

[toastywombel]

This is actually a fair point. I'll bring it up.

 

 

 

We're not aiming for a "grand scale," though. Conversations don't have to end all religious strife to be productive or interesting.

 

Thank you.

[Phi for All]

I can understand people on opposite sides of a fence having a discussion across it and being intractable about their positions, but it bothers me that there are those who want to stop those people from having the discussion in the first place. You can't hear them unless you go over there, but you're claiming that just the sight of them through the window is offensive?! That seems extreme.

[StringJunky]

It is somewhat hard to ignore it for new members, or new readers, especially when the topics from the religion section are included on the featured posts on the front page. At least they could be omitted from the front page of the site like the politics section posts are.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

 

 

?

 

That's a good point.

[Mr Skeptic]

It is somewhat hard to ignore it for new members, or new readers, especially when the topics from the religion section are included on the featured posts on the front page. At least they could be omitted from the front page of the site like the politics section posts are.

 

Indeed. Especially since new members can't even post to them. I do recall hearing that these forums were for us forum regulars, since many of us do want to discuss these topics.

[Sisyphus]

It is true that there are many online forums where one can discuss religious matters, and that this is a science forum, dedicated to a completely different type of discussion. However, I still think there is value in a religion forum in which all the participants are self-selected members of a science forum. Religion is not science, but this forum will still (for the most part) have a common ground of an interest in and respect for science, which I think can lead to a different flavor of discussion than what one encounters on general religion forums.