Religious Conservatives Not Happy With Cosmos

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by fastsix, Mar 19, 2014.

  1. lacuna
    Online

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    8,813
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    Ratings Received:
    +657
    • Like Like x 1
  2. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    22,183
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,328
    Until very recently, I think nearly every strain of thought in the West supposed an underlying order to the universe.
  3. lacuna
    Online

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    8,813
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    Ratings Received:
    +657
    Hawking elucidates well for the layman as to why there was No Thing before the Big Bang. So what is your reasoning as to why you think "the Universe is endless... and part of a continuum... with no begging [beginning?] and no end"?
  4. lacuna
    Online

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    8,813
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    Ratings Received:
    +657
    Mystical Judaism attempts to find answers to these question in the disciplines and studies of Kabbalah. Are you at all familiar with the term or any of the theories?
  5. cocodrilo
    Offline

    cocodrilo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    10,939
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +682
    I have heard of Kabbalah but have never looked into it. (Phonetically it sounds too much like blah blah blah.)
  6. cocodrilo
    Offline

    cocodrilo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    10,939
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +682
    There is an underlying order - physical laws - but what's behind the order? God is just "supposed"? Based on what evidence or rationale? Seems to me it has to be ultimately intuitive, or, for lack of a better term, based on common sense. But is there some "common sense" school of thought on this? I remember Anselm's (I think it was him) argument based on nothing greater than God can be conceived or something, but I never understood it.
  7. lacuna
    Online

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    8,813
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    Ratings Received:
    +657
    It's an ancient practice/tradition and rabbis and sages versed in it disciplines forbade anyone who was not a married Jewish male over 40 years old from learning what it taught. Those restrictions have eased but that married/mature context is strongly applicable to the knowledge contained within the discipline. Unfortunately rogue teachers like Rav Berg and Madonna's interest in it have caused it to be poorly regarded by skeptics.
  8. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    22,183
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,328
    I think that assumption has been called into question, begining around the late 19th century.
  9. Gatormb
    Offline

    Gatormb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,736
    Likes Received:
    246
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Bradenton, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +760
    Here's an interesting tidbit for you jdr:

    4 Muslim vs. 129 Jewish Nobel Prizes?
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000,
    or 20% of the world population.

    They have received the following Nobel Prizes:

    Literature:
    1988 - Najib Mahfooz

    Peace:
    1978 - Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat
    1994 - Yaser Arafat

    Chemistry:
    1999 - Ahmed Zewa

    TOTAL: FOUR



    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000,
    or about 0.02% of the world population.

    They have received the following Nobel Prizes:

    Literature:
    1910 - Paul Heyse
    1927 - Henri Bergson
    1958 - Boris Pasternak
    1966 - Shmuel Yosef Agnon
    1966 - Nelly Sachs
    1976 - Saul Bellow
    1978 - Isaac Bashevis Singer
    1981 - Elias Canetti
    1987 - Joseph Brodsky
    1991 - Nadine Gordimer World

    Peace:
    1911 - Alfred Fried
    1911 - Tobias Michael Carel Asser
    1968 - Rene Cassin
    1973 - Henry Kissinger
    1978 - Menachem Begin
    1986 - Elie Wiesel
    1994 - Shimon Peres
    1994 - Yitzhak Rabin

    Physics:
    1905 - Adolph Von Baeyer
    1906 - Henri Moissan
    1907 - Albert Abraham Michelson
    1908 - Gabriel Lippmann
    1910 - Otto Wallach
    1915 - Richard Willstaetter
    1918 - Fritz Haber
    1921 - Albert Einstein
    1922 - Niels Bohr
    1925 - James Franck
    1925 - Gustav Hertz
    1943 - Gustav Stern
    1943 - George Charles de Hevesy
    1944 - Isidor Issac Rabi
    1952 - Felix Bloc h
    1954 - Max Born
    1958 - Igor Tamm
    1959 - Emilio Segre
    1960 - Donald A. Glaser
    1961 - Robert Hofstadter
    1961 - Melvin Calvin
    1962 - Lev Davidovich Landau
    1962 - Max Ferdinand Perutz
    1965 - Richard Phillips Feynman
    1965 - Julian Schwinger
    1969 - Murray Gell-Mann
    1971 - Dennis Gabor
    1972 - William Howard Stein
    1973 - Brian David Josephson
    1975 - Benjamin Mottleson
    1976 - Burton Richter
    1977 - Ilya Prigogine
    1978 - Arno Allan Penzias
    1978 - Peter L Kapitza
    1979 - Stephen Weinberg
    1979 - Sheldon Glashow
    1979 - Herbert Charle s Brown
    1980 - Paul Berg
    1980 - Walter Gilbert
    1981 - Roald Hoffmann
    1982 - Aaron Klug
    1985 - Albert A. Hauptman
    1985 - Jerome Karle
    1986 - Dudley R. Herschbach
    1988 - Robert Huber
    1988 - Leon Lederman
    1988 - Melvin Schwartz
    1988 - Jack Steinberger
    1989 - Sidney Altman
    1990 - Jerome Friedman
    1992 - Rudolph Marcus
    1995 - Martin Perl
    2000 - Alan J. Heeger

    Economics:
    1970 - Paul Anthony Samuelson
    1971 - Simon Kuznets
    1972 - Kenneth Joseph Arrow
    1975 - Leonid Kantorovich
    1976 - Milton Friedman
    1978 - Herbert A. Simon
    1980 - Lawrence Robert Klein
    1985 - Franco Modigliani
    1987 - Robert M. Solow
    1990 - Harry Markowitz
    1990 - Merton Miller
    1992 - Gary Becker
    1993 - Robert Fogel

    Medicine:
    1908 - Elie Metchnikoff
    1908 - Paul Erlich
    1914 - Robert Barany
    1922 - Otto Meyerhof
    1930 - Karl Landsteiner
    1931 - Otto Warburg
    1936 - Otto Loewi
    1944 - Joseph Erlanger
    1944 - Herbert Spencer Gasser
    1945 - Ernst Boris Chain
    1946 - Hermann Joseph Muller
    1950 - Tadeus Reichstein
    1952 - Selman Abra ham Waksman
    1953 - Hans Krebs
    1953 - Fritz Albert Lipmann
    1958 - Joshua Lederberg
    1959 - Arthur Kornberg
    1964 - Konrad Bloch
    1965 - Francois Jaco b
    1965 - Andre Lwoff
    1967 - George Wald
    1968 - Marshall W. Nirenberg
    1969 - Salvador Luria
    1970 - Julius Axelrod
    1970 - Sir Bernard Katz
    1972 - Gerald Maurice Edelman
    1975 - Howard Martin Temin
    1976 - Baruch S. Blumberg
    1977 - Roselyn Sussman Yalow
    1978 - Daniel Nathans
    1980 - Baruj Benacerraf
    1984 - Cesar Milstein
    1985 - Michael Stuart Brown
    1985 - Joseph L. Goldstein
    1986 - Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini]
    1988 - Gertrude Elion
    1989 - Harold Varmus
    1991 - Erwin Neher
    1991 - Bert Sakmann
    1993 - Richard J. Roberts
    1993 - Phillip Sharp
    1994 - Alfred Gilman
    1995 - Edward B. Lewis

    TOTAL: 129 ONE HUNDRED TWENTY NINE
  10. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,154
    Likes Received:
    4,059
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,922
    What's your point?
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. tim85
    Online

    tim85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    3,818
    Likes Received:
    278
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +997
    The majority of the world has essentially believed in some kind of spiritual God essentially since we've been recording history, debatably the majority of the world thought it was flat (was this really the majority of the world? I mean, come on - maybe the majority of the civilized European world at the time) for a couple hundred years, if that. I'm not saying we should use 'majoritarian' arguments, just saying that the comparison you're using I don't believe is applicable.
  12. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    22,183
    Likes Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,328
    A Western-centric award has been more often awarded to Westerners?
  13. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,154
    Likes Received:
    4,059
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,922
    Can't we also say then that your argument about the majority of the world "essentially" believing in "some kind of spiritual God" could be called in into the same type of question you are asking about my use of belief in a flat earth? Was it really just one god? I mean, come on, maybe for a "majority" of civilized European world at the time? What about Asia and other lands?

    Point is that it's very easy to make a fallacious argument based on majority views and I simply used flat earth as an example. If you want to split hairs over it, go ahead, but you'll have that part of the conversation with yourself.
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2014
  14. lacuna
    Online

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    8,813
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    Ratings Received:
    +657
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-a-flat-earth/2011/10/10/gIQAXszQaL_blog.html

    If you learned in school that Christopher Columbus sailed from Spain in 1492 and crossed the Atlantic Ocean, disproving a common belief in those days that the Earth was flat, then the lesson was wrong.

    Historians say there is no doubt that the educated in Columbus’s day knew quite well that the Earth was not flat but round. In fact, this was known many centuries earlier.

    As early as the sixth century B.C., Pythagoras — and later Aristotle and Euclid — wrote about the Earth as a sphere. Ptolemy wrote “Geography” at the height of the Roman Empire, 1,300 years before Columbus sailed, and considered the idea of a round planet as fact.

    “Geography” became a standard reference, and Columbus himself owned a copy. For him, the big question was not the shape of the Earth but the size of the ocean he wanted to cross.

    During the early Middle Ages, it is true that many Europeans succumbed to rumor and started believing that they lived on a flat Earth.

    But Islamic countries knew better and preserved the Greek learning. By the late Middle Ages, Europe had caught up and in some cases surpassed the knowledge of ancient Greece and medieval Islam.

    If you learned in school that Christopher Columbus sailed from Spain in 1492 and crossed the Atlantic Ocean, disproving a common belief in those days that the Earth was flat, then the lesson was wrong.

    Historians say there is no doubt that the educated in Columbus’s day knew quite well that the Earth was not flat but round. In fact, this was known many centuries earlier.

    As early as the sixth century B.C., Pythagoras — and later Aristotle and Euclid — wrote about the Earth as a sphere. Ptolemy wrote “Geography” at the height of the Roman Empire, 1,300 years before Columbus sailed, and considered the idea of a round planet as fact.

    “Geography” became a standard reference, and Columbus himself owned a copy. For him, the big question was not the shape of the Earth but the size of the ocean he wanted to cross.

    During the early Middle Ages, it is true that many Europeans succumbed to rumor and started believing that they lived on a flat Earth.

    But Islamic countries knew better and preserved the Greek learning. By the late Middle Ages, Europe had caught up and in some cases surpassed the knowledge of ancient Greece and medieval Islam.

    Letronne insisted that early Christian writers thought the Earth was flat. Though they did not, he was widely quoted for many years.

    Others, too, helped perpetuate the myth.

    The 1995 book “Poetry of the Universe: A Mathematical Exploration of the Cosmos,” by Robert Osserman, professor emeritus of mathematics at Stanford University, makes clear that Columbus did not worry that he would fall off the Earth’s edge.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,154
    Likes Received:
    4,059
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,922
    That's the first thing I would think (not the only one though) but I don't believe that was what motivated mb to post it.
  16. lacuna
    Online

    lacuna Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    8,813
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville
    Ratings Received:
    +657
    He's done this sort of thing before and I think he does it as an endorsement of the Judeo-Christian tradition and to specifically denigrate Muslims. I call it dishonorable. But he should respond for himself rather than have the reader speculate about his motivation.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,154
    Likes Received:
    4,059
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,922
    Good post! Yep. Lots of myths abound about it. Even so, I think the point of my using flat earth was pretty self-evident as a convention to raise the notion that a majority view doesn't mean "right" or "correct" view. I suppose I'll have to pick another example in the future :)
  18. tim85
    Online

    tim85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    3,818
    Likes Received:
    278
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +997
    I just don't think you can disprove the majoritarian argument of "most people believe in a God" with, "at one time the majority of people thought the world was flat." I don't know if you could even prove that the majority of people on the planet at any given time really believe the world was flat(Lacuna has no proven this herself, most people probably did not think the world flat, so on that alone comparing the two isn't going to prove anything), and it also wasn't a belief that had held generally unchanged for thousands of years across cultures, continents, etc. As I said - my point has nothing to do with using majoritarian arguments to win a debate, just that, if you were going to use them - bringing up "the majority...world was flat.." would do nothing to (dis)prove anything.

    I personally think the majoritarian argument of, "the whole world essentially believes in God" is pretty strong because there's very few things you can say humans, as a whole across continents and cultures, have believed something generally unchanged for thousands of years. I don't think thats a typical, "hey, everyone says it's true, so it has to be true"-type argument, I think it's a, "hey, look at human history - humans have felt spiritual connections to things including the idea of a higher power since the beginning of recorded history, and they do still even today, why is that?" I think it's C.S. Lewis, and I'm sure other theologians before him, that kind of proposed the idea that human beings are designed by God himself to have a spiritual capacity within all of us. It's part of the driving factor for essentially the vast majority of humanity to believe in such things, and something I personally believe as well.
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2014
  19. jimgata
    Offline

    jimgata Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,283
    Likes Received:
    113
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +545
    If the universe was created 15 billion years ago by the big bang, where did all that matter that exploded to create the big bang come from and what put it in place to explode.
  20. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,154
    Likes Received:
    4,059
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,922
    That is what I am talking about with your splitting hairs. The substantive point was not about "proving the majority" but about the potential logical fallacy that can come from invoking a majority viewpoint as evidence of being right without making a thorough argument about why the majority opinion is right based on other evidence, i.e. my point about "being careful about how to use such an argument."

Share This Page