Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Scientific Revolution/Class Discussion

A brief response to Cy's thoughts as well as our discussion on knowledge:

Do we need proof, evidence, a scientific explanation? NO. Certain things can not be explained. Whether you connect these to God or any other force is entirely up to you. I gave this example earlier: a recent plane crash this year killed 153 people on board except for one little girl. Now anyone can come up with numerous scientific or obvious explanations for why she did not die and plunge into the ocean like the rest however, in my opinion, I believe that God has the power to intervene.

That is just my opinion.

Scientific Revolution

Why was Europe so special? Europe was special because it was home to the brilliant minds in the world of Science. These being: Corpernicus, Cardano, Galileo etc. Although they were intelligent, that and their theories made them targets for the Church. Theories like Galileo's, bashed those of the church. In order for peace to be maintained between Church and Science, there would have to be an even amount of influence. Without it, you have people like Giordano Bruno, who was burned at the stake. Science could not overrule the church, it was just unacceptable. This is why you see Galileo and Newton writing pieces stating that the key to human salvation can only be attained through religion and religious practice.


2 comments:

  1. I both agree and disagree with Rehan.

    The part I agree with is the statement that evidence is not always necessary in order for something to be true. For example, it's completely possible (although i actually did not) that i went on google and found this response and copy pasted it. There isn't a very good reason not to believe me, but there are people out there, Cy for example, that wouldn't believe me for sure unless they looked at every webpage on the internet to make sure it didn't contain this comment. What's the point? As human beings, we are not at the point where every single word that comes out of our mouths is a lie. There are also certain things that we simply don't have the ability to explain yet. Things like the beginning of the universe, or the meaning of life will be argued over for time to come. If we have no evidence to prove anything in either situation, should we just not have any beliefs at all?

    I disagree with Rehan's statement about God's intervention in the case of the plane crash. Part of this might be the fact that I'm less religious in general, but i consider the girl's survival to be plain luck. If God had the power to intervene, why didn't he just save every passenger onboard? I'm not trying to disprove Rehan's religious beliefs, this is just my personal opinion. I would be more likely to believe some scientific explanation about how the girl was in the safest seat on impact and how her tray table was up etc.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Some questions for Rehan: Can you explain why you reject the scientific explanation for why the girl survived? Also, do you any evidence (what are your reasons) for believing that God exists, and that he actually intervened? If you have no evidence, couldn't one just as well say that something as ridiculous as invisible unicorns, or the flying spaghetti monster saved the girl (both claims not being backed by any evidence, as well)?

    ReplyDelete