Religion Vs. Science

[rikbe]

Originally posted by Deni

Really I have some Platonic slant and believe that a space of "pre-forms" having a complex structure can exist and influence the material world. It can explain many misterous fenomena of evolution, animals' behaviour, human consciousness etc.

It is the first time I hear of a "pre-forms" theory. Do you have more information about it? I think I can explain most of animal's/human behaviour but consciousness is still not very clear to me.

[Deni]

Originally posted by rikbe

It is the first time I hear of a "pre-forms" theory. Do you have more information about it? I think I can explain most of animal's/human behaviour but consciousness is still not very clear to me.

Hello ricbe
Just old philosophical tradition that in Europe originated from Plato: the world can have a background or more deep levels, from which it unfolds etc, etc.
There is no conventional strict theory of it though this idea has some kind of renaissance at present in many forms, like ‘implicate order’ (David Bohm), ‘semantic field’ (Nalimov), 'morfic field' (Rupert Sheldrake) etc.

[The_Spirit_Of_Melodies]

Originally posted by Deni
Yes the theory of evolution has holes. But an opposite theory just doens't exist or is nor a theory.
May be some facts prove that the evolution was guided. But even if it was it doesn't mean 'guided by a God'. There can exist laws of the nature we don't know. For example on Gordon's TV scientific show (Russian NTV chanell) one scientist offered a hypothesis that 'calculating abilities of the vacuum' can be involved in guiding the evolution and it can explain the emergence of the first organisms, jumps in evolution etc. I don't know if this theory is right but anyway ratioinal explanations like this can exist.
The main fault of creatioism is is throws out zillion facts from different fields of biology and paleontology which prove the fact of evolution itself.
What amuses me mostly in many religionists is some kind of 'mental incontinence'. From the fact of problems with the Darwinism they conclude that ANY evolution doesn't exist. From it they conclude that it was guided by a loving God. Finally they conclude that it proves their chimeras of the hell and paradise, of the Armageddon and etc. However there can be zillion explanations that don't involve anything of it.
I wouldn't say that I am 100% atheist. Really I have some Platonic slant and believe that a space of "pre-forms" having a complex structure can exist and influence the material world. It can explain many misterous fenomena of evolution, animals' behaviour, human consciousness etc. But I don't want to pile up phantasm on belief and invent 'a God' and ascribe properties to him like 'loving'. 'having emotions' like some religionist do.
We must learn much more about the world to make any conclusions about this subject.

That "Guide" was adaptation.

[Deni]

Originally posted by The_Spirit_Of_Melodies
That "Guide" was adaptation.

"Adaptation" may be a purpose of evolution. The word "Guide" refers to the mechanism of evolution which is far from understanding.

[ATHEIST4U]

I base my beliefs on faith, and PURE common sense. No, there wasnt a big fart in the universe that magically created us..... Darwins theory can also be thrown out, because if amebas and plankton magically changed up to higher animals(plants), then they all would have, and we would no longer have them on earth. If monkeys and apes magically changed into humans, then there would be NO monkeys or apes left. If grasshoppers evolved into other animals, there would be no grasshoppers.
THere is a HUGE difference in "adaptation" to your environment, and "evolution". People seem to confuse the 2.

I love how you take each topic you disagree with and systematically turn the idea into a sarcastic statement lacking a source for proof and acting like your obviously correct. Every topic you brought up has had massive amounts of studies done and so far each is still quite controversial. Until you take the time to get serious and less ignorant then I don't think it's even worth going over what you actually said.

[justoleme]

Can you explain infinity for me? Is it endless? If so,how can science prove that if they have not measured to the part where it is endless?Do we just accept the word of__________? or the committe which concluded the answer ?Have the scientist proved God does not exist? If so,What evidence was stated? What was in the area of our present Galaxy before the big bang caused all the planets?Is the big bang theory a part of and in agreement with the evolution theory?Can science lay down laws as fact then later change their minds?If so,, Can science be wrong? One vital question here.Does science have a plan to undo the nuclear problem they have created? Or will we just rise in a cloud of smoke in the near future? If so,,Would this be the greatest monument to the contribution of science to solveing mans problems of egotistical showmanship?

[ATHEIST4U]

who is that post directed towards?