Will science ever find the ultimate answer to God? - Page 5

madnak · #41 10-27-2007, 08:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Only because I'm still looking for a solution. I doubt theism will endure in my head if I give up on a solution to the problem of evil. As long as I consider ia an "open problem" then I am in the realm of two conflicting beliefs competing against one another. I'd be interested if you think I have to cede rationality here (as I do with choice of religion) given I dont claim certainty arising from faith?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily, but I think your situation strongly favors the agnostic approach. You seem reluctant to accept that approach, and I've never understood why.

mickeyg13 · #42 10-28-2007, 06:09 PM

I believe I can prove that science cannot disprove the existence of God.

Suppose that scientists and/or philosophers believe they have an irrefutable proof for the nonexistence of God. Any test they come up with automatically presupposes that it could not have been altered by an omnipotent God. But an omnipotent God could have, using His omnipotence, altered the results of the tests to show God does not exist, even though He does. No test by humans could be beyond the possibility for it to have been altered by an omnipotent God, therefore we can never prove it either way.

ILOVEPOKER929 · #43 10-28-2007, 11:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I believe I can prove that science cannot disprove the existence of God.

Suppose that scientists and/or philosophers believe they have an irrefutable proof for the nonexistence of God. Any test they come up with automatically presupposes that it could not have been altered by an omnipotent God. But an omnipotent God could have, using His omnipotence, altered the results of the tests to show God does not exist, even though He does. No test by humans could be beyond the possibility for it to have been altered by an omnipotent God, therefore we can never prove it either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Youve give us no special insight here. It is common knowledge that science cant disprove the existence of God. There is no rational scientist or atheist that would disagree with you.

AlexM · #44 10-29-2007, 03:20 AM

Haven't you ever heard of Christian Scientists? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

m_the0ry · #45 10-29-2007, 03:45 AM

Trying to use science to answer the question of God is like using Eratosthenes sieve to answer questions about politics.

As mentioned just two posts above God is an unfalsifiable concept which means it is not within the realm of science. It is within the realm of philosophy.

Alex-db · #46 10-29-2007, 06:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Trying to use science to answer the question of God is like using Eratosthenes sieve to answer questions about politics.

As mentioned just two posts above God is an unfalsifiable concept which means it is not within the realm of science. It is within the realm of philosophy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Philosophy should be persued scientifically. Its ideas like the above that cause lay-people to doubt philosophers ever achieve anything.

Perhaps we we could reasonably demote God into some area of art?

jogsxyz · #47 10-29-2007, 11:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe I can prove that science cannot disprove the existence of God.

Suppose that scientists and/or philosophers believe they have an irrefutable proof for the nonexistence of God. Any test they come up with automatically presupposes that it could not have been altered by an omnipotent God. But an omnipotent God could have, using His omnipotence, altered the results of the tests to show God does not exist, even though He does. No test by humans could be beyond the possibility for it to have been altered by an omnipotent God, therefore we can never prove it either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Youve give us no special insight here. It is common knowledge that science cant disprove the existence of God. There is no rational scientist or atheist that would disagree with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not how proofs work. The hypothesis will be
god exists. Then scientists will demonstrate that
the hypothesis is false.

kurto · #48 10-29-2007, 11:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe I can prove that science cannot disprove the existence of God.

Suppose that scientists and/or philosophers believe they have an irrefutable proof for the nonexistence of God. Any test they come up with automatically presupposes that it could not have been altered by an omnipotent God. But an omnipotent God could have, using His omnipotence, altered the results of the tests to show God does not exist, even though He does. No test by humans could be beyond the possibility for it to have been altered by an omnipotent God, therefore we can never prove it either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Youve give us no special insight here. It is common knowledge that science cant disprove the existence of God. There is no rational scientist or atheist that would disagree with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sort of difficult to prove or disprove the existence of something so vaguely defined. We'd need a concrete definition of "God" before one can even begin to prove or disprove its existence.

There could be a creator of the universe that isn't remotely like any of the religious 'gods.'...

What if there's a creature out there that is 10000x more intelligent then humans with mental powers we could never understand that may appear to us that has lived for 200K years and appears to be omnipotent. This creature can create galaxies and life. Would this make it fit the definition? Even if it was proven that this creature existed... it still wouldn't mean any of the religions were correct.

Still... the more important part of this is-- even if science finds the answers to how everything works. If it could one day explain just about everything in our universe... people who want to believe in undetectable invisible supercreatures will still believe.

ILOVEPOKER929 · #49 10-29-2007, 12:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I believe I can prove that science cannot disprove the existence of God.

Suppose that scientists and/or philosophers believe they have an irrefutable proof for the nonexistence of God. Any test they come up with automatically presupposes that it could not have been altered by an omnipotent God. But an omnipotent God could have, using His omnipotence, altered the results of the tests to show God does not exist, even though He does. No test by humans could be beyond the possibility for it to have been altered by an omnipotent God, therefore we can never prove it either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Youve give us no special insight here. It is common knowledge that science cant disprove the existence of God. There is no rational scientist or atheist that would disagree with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not how proofs work. The hypothesis will be
god exists. Then scientists will demonstrate that
the hypothesis is false.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes but scientists cannot do that. The existence of god cannot be disproved. Thats why the statment "I believe I can prove that science cannot disprove the existence of god" has no special insight.

I admit that I overlooked the possibility that the poster was speaking purely in didactic terms to help others who may not know how to articulate that the existence of god cannot be disproved. If that's the case then I missed the boat on this one.

I assumed that the poster was trying to give us some kind of insight.

jogsxyz · #50 10-29-2007, 03:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]

There could be a creator of the universe that isn't remotely like any of the religious 'gods.'...

What if there's a creature out there that is 10000x more intelligent then humans with mental powers we could never understand that may appear to us that has lived for 200K years and appears to be omnipotent. This creature can create galaxies and life. Would this make it fit the definition? Even if it was proven that this creature existed... it still wouldn't mean any of the religions were correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

The order of magnitude of any creator's intelligence and power to that of man's must be near infinite. Why would that creator care about man?