Christians afraid of Carl Sagan? (page 6)

PSacramento

you want to say that philosophy somehow take off where science end; first off i dont think its clear at all science has really "ended" somewhere in a meaningfull way with respect to water and wetness... i mean i just think i demonstrated that the answer "why is water wet" actually is subject to scientifical inquery.

secondly, and more importantly, do you really think philosophy has taken flight and given us any answers, per your examples?.

"God does not exist because it can be no other way" <--- did i just make an insightful philosophical argument people will ponder in the coming decades? i dont think so....

Ok then, since I am having a hard time explaining myself about my view of philosophy I will make it very simple:

Why is the Universe the way it is and why are we here?

How does science answer those questions?

How does science prove we think and have a concsience ?

villabolo

Vidiot:

"Do you know if he ever suggested any belief systems that might be decent candidates, or make any suggestions about what that kind of society might look like?"

So far as I know, based on the writings of his that I've read, he never took that idea and fleshed it out in detail as to what such a society would look like. Nor did he suggest any specific current religions/philosophies. In any case, it would have to be a radically different religion than any that have previously existed.

Villabolo

bohm

why jump all around the field.. philosophy does not really add anything to our understanding of water that is not (essentially) art does it?

Why is the Universe the way it is and why are we here?

How does science answer those questions?

well thats a long story and you wont get a definite answer :-). but i think philosophy is a bit overrated in that department.. what answers does philosophy really give? "I think therefore i am"? i sure couldnt point much out i would be proud to tell ET.

james_woods

Just as a matter of interest, this month's Discover magazine has a couple of articles on this subject, including the scientific possibility of "GOD".

An editorial includes comments on science versus philosophy.

PSacramento

well thats a long story and you wont get a definite answer :-). but i think philosophy is a bit overrated in that department.. what answers does philosophy really give? "I think therefore i am"? i sure couldnt point much out i would be proud to tell ET

But there is where philosophy is suppose to "start" and science "end".

There is no way sceince can answer why the universe is the way it is or why we are here, it can make a statement about the universe being SO and evne why such and such are this way, buT WHy they are THAT way and not other way is not what science is about.

Our minds are so awesome that we can imagine almost infinit possibilities and imagine things for far beyond our natural (known) universe that one has to ask "Why is that so", "why can we imagine"?

The simple statement of " I think therefore I am" is possibly the most profound statement in philosophy and yet, quite possibly, the LEAST profound in science, which underlines the vast difference between the two.

unshackled

There is no way sceince can answer why the universe is the way it is or why we are here

Philosophy can't answer that either. Philosophical thoughts on "why we are here" are just guesses. No one knows the answer.

Nathan Natas

Imagine how surprised Carl Sagan was when, after dying in 1996, he found himself to be one of the most fear-inspiring ghosts in the world!

Welcome to Our Ironic Universe, Carl!

SweetBabyCheezits

^

PSacramento

Philosophy can't answer that either. Philosophical thoughts on "why we are here" are just guesses. No one knows the answer.

Absolutley and philosophers are the first, or should be, to acknowledge that.

Very few people take a philosophical answer to a questions as "fact", however the issue is that when someone is an acknowledged scientist that people DO that, even said scientists.

unshackled

I can think of a lot worse scenarios where people take stated viewpoints as facts: Fox News, Glenn Beck, Jerry Falwell, etc. Thanks to the internet this is the age of information but, unfortunately, also very much the age of misinformation.

That said, I can see how someone that believes in the supernatural wouldn't appreciate Sagan's viewpoints. Nathan Natas nailed it.

Christians afraid of Carl Sagan?

Share this