Deists and scientists: peaceful coexistence

[kowalskil]

Deists and scientists: peaceful coexistence

I would very much like to know what people on this website think about peaceful coexistence between those who study our material world (scientists) and those who study our spiritual world (theologians). My attempt to write an essay on that subject failed, as you can see at:

http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/theology3.html

The webpage was prepared to generate a discussion. Those who post comments should refer to specific “contributions,” as numbered (or to specific persons, as numbered at the beginning). This will simplify the discussion.

And let us keep in mind that the main topic is peaceful coexistence. Is it possible? Is it desirable? What should we do promote it? etc.

Thank you in advance,

Ludwik Kowalski (see Google and Wikipedia)
Professor Emeritus
Montclair State University
.
.

[rumrunner]

Well professor, I'll answer your question now and read your essay later. Not as any insult, but due limited computer time for me. If you search back into early threads at this forum you will find a couple that will show how different members of this place feel about spirituality and science. Namely you will want to read "What happens when you die" and "Free Willy". I found that TWF has spiritualist people who are outnumbered by bull-headed scientists, so-be-it. I can't claim to know who is absolutely right, I can't even say I believe there is an absolute right. But one thing the spiritualists have going for them is that if they're right, they win everything. If they're wrong, they lose nothing. While the strict scientist has the opposite being true. I'm open minded on subject, I believe in a spiritual existence that does not deny the scientific truths we have come to know in the material world.

[Nessus]

Pascal's wager? Really?

[Khendraja'aro]

A philosopher claimed: "Possibly the gods exist, and possibly they do not. So why not believe in them in any case? If it's all true you'll go to a lovely place when you die, and if it isn't then you've lost nothing, right?" When the philosopher died, he woke up in a circle of gods holding nasty-looking sticks and one of them said: "We're going to show you what we think of Mr Clever Dick in these parts..."

[Dreadnaught]

I'm not sure what point is actually being advanced...but yeah, it would be nice if people could walk away from these culture-wars kinda things.

[agamemnus]

"Gods" are actually space aliens. The History Channel said so, so it must be true.

Srsly, a lot of that stuff is fairly convincing-- especially when there are absolutely no skeptics in the entire show...

Aside: I loved today's episode (edit: a rerun of Nov. 2010 episode). It had three examples of actual pre-last-ice-age underwater cities I had never heard of that had just been discovered recently.

[Nessus]

I'm not sure what point is actually being advanced...but yeah, it would be nice if people could walk away from these culture-wars kinda things.

Live and let die?

[Aimless]

Hey guys,

can we think of anything "spiritualists" might "lose" because of their beliefs? Ie. the costs of spiritualism?

Never mind that Padcal's wager doesn't seem to have so much to do with spiritualism as with theism, specifically the Christian variety (which makes one wonder about the wisdom of eg. Abu al Pascalwa'ali's w'ager).

[Nessus]

Hey guys,

can we think of anything "spiritualists" might "lose" because of their beliefs? Ie. the costs of spiritualism?

Never mind that Padcal's wager doesn't seem to have so much to do with spiritualism as with theism, specifically the Christian variety (which makes one wonder about the wisdom of eg. Abu al Pascalwa'ali's w'ager).

The added chance of a tendency for magical thinking might cause some harm to the person themselves in addition to those around them, magical practices encourage unhealthy behaviour in mating and sexual matters, seeking spiritual guidance of any kind usually has an associated monetary loss, and you can be swayed into violent/bigoted behaviour based on magical arguments. In moderation none of these are much more harmful than say, alcohol abuse.

I am here assuming that the word spiritual refers to some kind of belief system which entails magic of some kind. I wouldn't call psychotherapy spiritual, for instance (even if it isn't strictly scientific, either). And I've been lead to believe some forms of Buddhism can be kinda close to atheistic self-improvement and introspection.

But much like the alcoholic, the spiritualist might not experience a whole lot of loss except in isolated events, whereas the surrounding society does incur a net negative from their spirituality in the form of magically guided voting behaviour, child-rearing habits and so on. And if the spiritualist does such a good job at hiding their spirituality that none of these things can be detected, how spiritual can they truly be? Seems like wasted effort, though most human endeavours are.

[Nessus]

A really extreme example would be creationism which we hashed with Loki the other day: You probably don't lose much yourself if it's a part of your spirituality, it probably comes with all sorts of things that make you feel better. But you're limiting your child's career options if you insist on them also believing in Creationism (and why wouldn't you, children are your most beloved family members and caring for their immortal soul should be a high priority for a spiritual person), and infringing on the possible career paths of others if you vote to keep Creationism in the class room.

You can be spiritual without believing in Creationism, of course, this was just an example that came to mind.