Religion: Real or Fake

[Jon Miller]

To compare it to a scientific theory isn't a fair comparison. With scientific theories there are predictions* that we can test to try and disprove the theory. People may 'believe' that something is the best theory we have at the moment, but a large proportion of scientists spend their time running experiments that can prove, disprove or enhance our understanding of those theories.

Religion doesn't make testable predictions.

Also, what you very rarely see is religious people spending a huge amount of time trying to disprove the feelings and 'personal evidence' which they understand to be the basis of their faith. Although psychologists are doing a lot of research into the way religion works with the brain.

*At least there are now some predictions of things that we can test for string theory.

String theory (as a GUT) is still not falsifiable, so I would argue that this isn't true.

None of the work of psychologists would in any way provide evidence in favor of or against religion.

And religion does make testable predictions, in Christianity, we are told that we will be transformed if we follow Christ. Additionally, we are told we will see God acting in our lives (albeit, not in the "I want to win the lottery" way). Additionally, religion does makes scientific predictions, namely of afterlives (some) and the future (some). Admittedly these aren't things that you can test, and then decide how much you like a religion, but it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist and religion is just some philosophy which has no real influence on your life.

And why should the religious try to disprove their theory? We don't ask that of string theorists. Nor other groups of philosophy (natural or metaphysical). Why is religion held as inherently less believable?

JM

[Kidlicious]

Playing studid Wezil? How about this, neuroscientists have found physical evidence that prayer has a positive effect on the brain. Now I'm not sure but I'm assuming that they have also found that drug use has a negative effect.

The simple answer to your question is that a 'crazy' person is probably crazy, in part, because they take drugs and they don't do healthy things like pray.

[Wezil]

Playing studid Wezil?

No, but I'm wondering if you are playing at it or if it just comes natural to you.

The simple answer to your question is that a 'crazy' person is probably crazy, in part, because they take drugs and they don't do healthy things like pray.

I see. Crazy people are non-religious drug users. Got it.

My earlier suspicion is confirmed. You are nutty.

[Wezil]

The answer I've always heard was "Anyone can talk to god it's only crazy when you claim god is talking to you."

Based upon the theists on this board however I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear them say god talks to them.

[Docfeelgood]

I see. Crazy people are non-religious drug users. Got it.

My earlier suspicion is confirmed. You are nutty.

well, maybe nutty is a lil harsh,
more like confused.
and hardheaded

[giblets]

You would think that with God talking to him, he would have better arguments.

[MOBIUS]

Another dodge.

Though he has basically admitted to being mentally ill from taking drugs and needing medication, sorry meditation to keep him sane.

So I guess he's saying there is no difference between a crazy person and a person who talks to god...

It's pretty much the only believable thing he's said yet in this entire thread...

[MikeH]

String theory (as a GUT) is still not falsifiable, so I would argue that this isn't true.

Edit: Sorry, you said as a GUT.

I think that's mainly why String Theory isn't completely accepted yet in the same way that, say, Relativity or Evolution are.

[MikeH]

And why should the religious try to disprove their theory? We don't ask that of string theorists. Nor other groups of philosophy (natural or metaphysical). Why is religion held as inherently less believable?

Why should it be any more believable?

ok fair enough, allow us to disprove your theory for you!

[giblets]

So, let's say you heard a voice in your head, and it said it was God and it wanted you to kill your son. Would you obey? Or would you seek a mental health professional?

[Wezil]

I would take fewer drugs. [/Kid]

[MOBIUS]

So, let's say you heard a voice in your head, and it said it was God and it wanted you to kill your son. Would you obey? Or would you seek a mental health professional?

That sounds like that guy out of the bible, Abraham?

[MikeH]

Ah, the Abraham test.

[Jon Miller]

Edit: Sorry, you said as a GUT.

I think that's mainly why String Theory isn't completely accepted yet in the same way that, say, Relativity or Evolution are.

Relativity made many predictions which were later seen.

String Theory (as a GUT) isn't even able to provide well defined observables.

Among experimentalists, String Theory has a large selection of doubters. Recently, String Theorists are no longer getting hired as often, and other theorists are getting hired more often, so I think the greater community also has more doubters than previously.

JM

[MOBIUS]

That's another thing that bugs me about all these organised religions:

Back in the mists of time, all these various gods are popping in and out, meddling with people's lives, smiting armies, sending plagues etc...

My question is: Where have they all been these last many hundreds of years!?