AIBU to ask your opinions on God?

[Violetduck]

Do you beleive there is a God? I would like to, but how can he exist alongside modern science?

Aibu to believe in something more?

I'm somewhat curious what aspect of 'morality' a previous poster thinks can't be explained by science - ie non supernatural explanations. There are certainly explanations for altruism; many other 'moral' concepts are cultural artefacts.

Errol once again I agree with you. Many of the things we see as morally 'good' are very easy to trace back to biological imperatives relating to the survival and prosperity of the species as a whole.

@ErrolTheDragon

I'm somewhat curious what aspect of 'morality' a previous poster thinks can't be explained by science - ie non supernatural explanations. There are certainly explanations for altruism; many other 'moral' concepts are cultural artefacts.

I don’t understand your question?

Also don’t know which poster you’re referring to?

Do you really think that as a species we wouldn’t have a moral code without something like the 10 Commandments as the foundations? We take stuff like that for granted now because it’s so ingrained in society but I suppose back then they needed a supernatural police figure to keep people in check. Bottom line is maybe that humans, if left unchecked, are untrustworthy?

“Beware of altruism. It is based on self-deception, the root of all evil.” Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love (1973)

I'm not a believer. I get the notion of something other but it saddens me that for centuries organisations have used a natural human sense of mystery and wonder to oppress, abuse and manipulate large groups of people. Religion needs to stop so human morality can actually get going. I know it's unpopular but I think whole countries will keep people in awful situations thanks to faith.

One day it is perfectly conceivable that science will come up with provable theories that will explain gravity, consciousness, and morality - whether the layman will understand them is another thing but the layman doesn't need to understand any of the hard maths behind rocket science to use the GPS built into their phones.

Even committed atheist physicists know there is no explanation, and accept that, and I’ve yet to hear just one actually say they expect to in the future. I suppose they know that it’s a very weak argument to say “well one day we will”. But they actually do embarrass spthemselves when they proclaim that something can come from nothing, but not explain how. Now THAT is blind faith.

I'm somewhat curious what aspect of 'morality' a previous poster thinks can't be explained by science - ie non supernatural explanations. There are certainly explanations for altruism; many other 'moral' concepts are cultural artefacts.

If you can explain morality through science you’re clever than the top physicists the world has ever known. Not one of them has ever pretended to.

I’ve no understanding of the scientific evolution but don’t believe the Book of Genesis version - it’s not something that bothers me or that I think about.

@ArrowsOfMistletoe

Errol once again I agree with you. Many of the things we see as morally 'good' are very easy to trace back to biological imperatives relating to the survival and prosperity of the species as a whole.

What about the selfish gene?

@winterberries77

One day it is perfectly conceivable that science will come up with provable theories that will explain gravity, consciousness, and morality - whether the layman will understand them is another thing but the layman doesn't need to understand any of the hard maths behind rocket science to use the GPS built into their phones.

Even committed atheist physicists know there is no explanation, and accept that, and I’ve yet to hear just one actually say they expect to in the future. I suppose they know that it’s a very weak argument to say “well one day we will”. But they actually do embarrass spthemselves when they proclaim that something can come from nothing, but not explain how. Now THAT is blind faith.

I think there’s a word for an excessive and blind faith in science. Think it is called Scientism.

I’m intrigued by the reasons a person has to explain everything by science alone? I appreciate that science is great (no doubt about it) but there’s more than just science too.

Xnon I don't pretend to explain everything by science alone. I just accept there are things that cannot be explained (yet). Maybe those things will never be explained. I just don't think 'God did it' is an acceptable explanation, hence my atheism. I'm happy to not know.

Also having just looked up The Selfish Gene - that's about genes, not about people being selfish. In fact the thrust of its main argument is that a gene's drive to survive and propagate with genes resembling itself is one of the things that leads to human altruism. A logical follow-on from that is that we do indeed not need a Biblical moral code to keep us decent - our genes' drive for survival will do that for us.

You contend that there's more than just science - of course there is. There's faith. However, beyond that, there is no evidence of a supernatural creator deity. The existence of the universe is not evidence of a creator of the universe. The existence of a fish is evidence of... the existence of fish.

But they actually do embarrass spthemselves when they proclaim that something can come from nothing, but not explain how.

But scientists do nothing of the sort, Winterberries. They do not proclaim, they ask questions and then research in order to answer those questions. The fact that the questions are often not fully answered, or not answered at all, is part of the process that is science. Science is not about the answers, it's about the questions. It's not about the destination, it's about the journey. In the course of that process, humanity learns things it did not know before. It's hard, often thankless work, not helped by the fact that some people have no understanding of what science is trying to do.

Faith lives by answers, science lives by questions. We are all free to choose our path. I would hope we could all be better than to describe the choices of others as 'embarrassing'.

@ArrowsOfMistletoe

Xnon I don't pretend to explain everything by science alone. I just accept there are things that cannot be explained (yet). Maybe those things will never be explained. I just don't think 'God did it' is an acceptable explanation, hence my atheism. I'm happy to not know.

Also having just looked up The Selfish Gene - that's about genes, not about people being selfish. In fact the thrust of its main argument is that a gene's drive to survive and propagate with genes resembling itself is one of the things that leads to human altruism. A logical follow-on from that is that we do indeed not need a Biblical moral code to keep us decent - our genes' drive for survival will do that for us.

You contend that there's more than just science - of course there is. There's faith. However, beyond that, there is no evidence of a supernatural creator deity. The existence of the universe is not evidence of a creator of the universe. The existence of a fish is evidence of... the existence of fish.

It was a while ago since I read The Selfish Gene but I did so mindful that the author had a predetermined angle because of his own atheism.

Personally I think it’s a bit more complicated. It’s quite easy with the benefit of hindsight to be like “oh well this moral code traces back to this biological imperative”. It’s conflating social sciences with biological sciences and gets messy.

“Thou shall not commit adultery” has a complex moral and biological relationship. Morally it’s probably about social cohesion and creating family unit for offspring to feel safe; less drama etc. The conflict is that biologically the urge is perhaps to commit adultery and benefit from a more varied gene pool. We are animals at our base biology but what makes us different is our ability to think morally.

Xnon I think there's no such thing as a clear cut scientific answer that isn't multifactorial - unless you're into things like maths and physics, and even there those things aren't universal. As soon as you start studying animals, biological and social sciences start intersecting. I don't think you can easily separate moral from biological imperatives; I think they're intertwined and rooted in each other.

Prosocial behaviours are visible in animals other than humans, so I'm not at all sure we are all that 'different'. We certainly shouldn't be claiming privileges and rights based on our morals.

Faith lives by answers,

If you have answers you don't need faith. Faith is believing in something without solid proof.
Belief in god is a statement of faith.
Many believe in Einstiens theory of relativity yet these are unproven theories, they may fit the world as we know it but until proven are just theories. Believing in them can be a sign of faith.
Most of us happily believe in things we can't prove but believe someone somewhere can and we'll go with that.

Its just sad that some choose to ridcule others beliefs.

@ArrowsOfMistletoe

Xnon I think there's no such thing as a clear cut scientific answer that isn't multifactorial - unless you're into things like maths and physics, and even there those things aren't universal. As soon as you start studying animals, biological and social sciences start intersecting. I don't think you can easily separate moral from biological imperatives; I think they're intertwined and rooted in each other.

Prosocial behaviours are visible in animals other than humans, so I'm not at all sure we are all that 'different'. We certainly shouldn't be claiming privileges and rights based on our morals.

Your original comment was “Many of the things we see as morally 'good' are very easy to trace back to biological imperatives relating to the survival and prosperity of the species as a whole.”

That read like you were trying to get to a very clear cut scientific answer that wasn’t multifactorial... maybe I interpreted your meaning.

@bigfatliar a scientific theory isn't the same as an unproven idea - it has a particular meaning which gives it more validity than just a notion.

@BigFatLiar

Faith lives by answers,

If you have answers you don't need faith. Faith is believing in something without solid proof.
Belief in god is a statement of faith.
Many believe in Einstiens theory of relativity yet these are unproven theories, they may fit the world as we know it but until proven are just theories. Believing in them can be a sign of faith.
Most of us happily believe in things we can't prove but believe someone somewhere can and we'll go with that.

Its just sad that some choose to ridcule others beliefs.

“It’s just sad that some choose to ridcule others beliefs.”

I second that. Sometimes it feels like if anyone admits to having a faith in something more they will be judged for being “stupid” or “irrational” or something. People should be allowed to have freedom of belief in whatever they want.

Still waiting to read what @ErrolTheDragon has to has to say about the Human discovery/invention and mathematical use of the number Zero coming from the Indian spiritual concept of nothing. It’s actually really interesting to read about, even if it does go into spirituality...

www.bbc.com/travel/story/20180807-how-india-gave-us-the-zero

“The invention of zero was a hugely significant mathematical development, one that is fundamental to calculus, which made physics, engineering and much of modern technology possible.”

Maths is Queen of the Sciences are all that...

@errolthedragon I think that morality is about trying to slow down entropy. Stop things getting hurt or breaking, at core. Then multiplied by local rules to prevent power passing to another group. Don't steal, because a) I've grown that aubergine and I need to eat it and b) i need to preserve my capacity to grow more aubergines here.

Sometimes it feels like if anyone admits to having a faith in something more they will be judged for being “stupid” or “irrational” or something. People should be allowed to have freedom of belief in whatever they want

Would you rather we didn't judge people by the values they espouse? So, I can say a massive racist, do you judge me for that belief?

My dear, you have the freedom to believe what you like and I have the freedom to judge whether I think it's a belief that brings more worth to the world or not.

Xnon I have a tendency not to see biological and social sciences as separate things, so that makes what explanations we have multifactorial by default. I should have made that clearer. What I have trouble with is the idea that humans are somehow special or better because we have morals - I think it's far less simple than that.

BigFatLiar I think there are people who 'believe' in Einsteins Theory of Relativity in the same way people believe in God, angels miracles and so on. To me that's like believing in a chair. It's there, it has a function. It's possible that at some point in the future, someone will invent something that has the function of a chair but is much better. Until then the chair is what I've got. I don't believe in it, I sit in it. Same with any scientific theory - after all you can't prove that a scientific theory is definitely true, you can only falsify it. And until it's falsified, it's what you have and you make it work. People don't understand how science work - the Theory of Evolution is technically just a theory, because it hasn't been proven, but right now it's the best answer we have to a knotty question, so it's what we work with. It's worth reading up on Karl Popper to understand this building block of science - the words 'it's only a theory' are often thrown about to dismiss scientific endeavour. Young Earth Creationists especially have form for this.

I don't think that scientific endeavour is at all the same thing as saying 'God did it' - because once you've said the latter, people often stop questioning (not everyone, obviously - otherwise we wouldn't have theology and religious philosophers). Scientists tend to ask a question, obtain a partial or imperfect answer, make do with it but continue to ask questions, refine their answers, keep searching. That's why we have progress - better housebuilding, better medicines, better vehicle design. And each improvement is built on the previous one.

Sometimes it feels like if anyone admits to having a faith in something more they will be judged for being “stupid” or “irrational” or something. People should be allowed to have freedom of belief in whatever they want

People do have freedom of belief in whatever they want. However, when that freedom of belief starts resulting in those beliefs being imposed on people who do not share that belief, we have a problem. There are still a lot of people who believe that homosexuality is wrong. They're allowed to hold that belief. However, if they have a child, that child comes out as gay and they then start treating that child badly/throwing them out of the family home, we have conflict and we will, rightly, have judgement. Having beliefs does not always entitle you to act on those beliefs and impose the consequences of those beliefs on people who are not you.

@winterberries77

But they actually do embarrass spthemselves when they proclaim that something can come from nothing, but not explain how. Now THAT is blind faith.

If something can't come from nothing, where did god come from and how did it happen?

Not after what happened in my, and DP's, childhoods.

Although something happened when I was born that I've never been able to shake, or explain, and the recollection has never changed. I'm watching my mother in labour, from above, at the moment of birth I "enter" the child. My mother was wearing a very unique necklace given to her by her mother, I only saw the necklace "in the flesh" a few years ago (I was 35). Unexplainable and surreal. Whilst I may not believe in a God, I do subscribe to the Buddhist/Tao principles of resurrection.

I believe without ever really thinking about it too deeply.
I like to think I’m going to see my loved ones in heaven some day. If I thought about it properly, I’d probably think the concept of religion and God is a load of cobblers. But it’s a sort of comfort so I stick with it. Not much of a church goer though.