The R&S Pantheism Thread (atheism, agnostic, believing, service)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I thought of it like you do too. Its about the system, taken as a whole, is their god.
the tree, the dirt, the sky ... the Forrest .... the oneness.
I don't pray to trees, but I have certainly hugged my share. Yes, it is about the system. Every living thing is important and connected and as such we (as in all creation) are part of that oneness.
I thought Pantheism was when you pray to a tree and think the tree is god. Hindus pray to a tree, thinking of an aspect of God that exists in trees, the same aspect which is in me
I believe there is a distinction, and it is called monism. If you don't see it, that's fine. Pantheism sits fine with me.
Praying to a tree is paganism.
Praising Oneness, through its representation, as something existing(a tree) is pantheism.
On that we certainly agree. I have never seen anyone, anywhere, claim there is anything "sacred or holy" about science or the scientific method. I'm not even sure what that would mean.
If not, then we're back to having a role for science, in helping us understand "how things work." Because that's all science does, when it's not being worshipped.
Not explicitly in such terms. Yet, you may make a simple experiment. Become a scientists (to what you will MUST follow previously established guidelines, generally accepted in scientific community) and then, try to go against some basic principles of same science. Like, say, there is no gravity. Or, there is no time. Or, there is no evolution. Or, perpetuum mobile is a practical solution for free energy. Or, that orgon generators are way to go, instead of photovoltaic cells. Or, my hands are shaking as I type, that there is no global warming (shhhh)
And, then we'll see, how far it'll get you. I believe, exactly then, you'll find out, what is "sacred and holy" in science.
Not explicitly in such terms. Yet, you may make a simple experiment. Become a scientists (to what you will MUST follow previously established guidelines, generally accepted in scientific community) and then, try to go against some basic principles of same science. Like, say, there is no gravity. Or, there is no time. Or, there is no evolution. Or, perpetuum mobile is a practical solution for free energy. Or, that orgon generators are way to go, instead of photovoltaic cells. Or, my hands are shaking as I type, that there is no global warming (shhhh)
And, then we'll see, how far it'll get you. I believe, exactly then, you'll find out, what is "sacred and holy" in science.
its more like if you are the first one to find something out, then you are the only one that thinks it.
But with science, the more you talk, the more people repeat your observation, the more say "He has a point, go prove him wrong.". Unlike religion, if its a huge discovery, its not a generational thing either ... its happens faster.
what separates the two is a "mechanism". Its that simple. Two competing mechanisms will be accepted if reasonable. Tow claims with no mechanisms aren't really considered past "we don't know." Unless being paid to research it. And unlike spirituality ... we don't say "oh, don't worry about verifying the claim, if you feel good about we will go with it."
Bull ... show a mechanism or go back and try again.
Global warming. we are coming out of an ice age ... what do you think temperatures are going to do?
where religion and science are the same is people. and as such have all problems that a group of people have.
We are headed into small ice age, actually. It has none to do with what Al Gore wants to say. It has all to do with precession. But, lo and behold, it's science, and it's a big no no in R&S!!!
We are headed into small ice age, actually. It has none to do with what Al Gore wants to say. It has all to do with precession. But, lo and behold, it's science, and it's a big no no in R&S!!!
don't worry about that part. The meat for you is that when a claim with a mechanism meets a claim without a mechanism, most scientist won't play games with "If it feels good it must be right for you.". Unless that scientist is in the field of psychology.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have never seen anyone, anywhere, claim there is anything "sacred or holy" about science or the scientific method. I'm not even sure what that would mean.
