Sometimes I find both sides of this argument of creationism versus evolution tend to abuse logical fallacies to prove their point. I do not buy the logic of "either you believe in God or you don't" because it is a fallacy.
Why should I take sides regarding belief and faith with regard to religion?
Like the existence of God, evolution is a matter of belief, for belief that evolution did occur is based on the archaeological evidence, but is actually based on faith in the scientific method. However, the scientific method fails to prove the existence of God because it requires belief in something outside the realm of science, which excludes use of the scientific method.
A Christian would have to base his faith on a fallible source called the Bible, much of which is exaggerated to the point of miraculous — the feeding of thousands as Jesus makes his Sermon on the Mount. As well, logical fallacies are often used to make a point, but on close examination they do not stand to reason — the Cretan tells lies.
This may be why the prudent Christian when faced with such challenges by non-believers claims Christianity is outside the realm of scientific argument and only has to do with the spiritual realm.
Within that realm, ANYTHING is possible. Within the realm of science, the scientific method requires evidence based on collection of data. Merely having faith in the face of lack of evidence is not proof of anything significant.
If we take the Bible as a collection of mytho-poetic prose designed to appeal to some of humanity's spiritual needs, then it becomes useful to the few people who believe. Yet the detractors who side with Christians would then object to calling the prose "myths".
In the case of the Bible, myth is defined as hidden truths revealed by consulting the compendium. This is why a good Bible cross references each chapter and verse against other chapters and verses.
Yet a rational mind that has faith in the scientific method makes the false conclusion that myths have only one definition as a fairy tale that does not hold any truth at all.
Obviously then, if it deals with the spiritual realm, then for atheists, the Bible is devoid of truth. This too is false.
Truth is not based on evidence; it is based on what the mind knows to be true i.e. if an atheist deems the spiritual realm to be unknowable because he really has no experience in dealing with it then, rather than saying so, he concludes that a Christian's experience with the spiritual realm is subjective and thus tainted. Because of his lack of experience, the atheist assumes that the spiritual realm is unknowable.
What the atheist sometimes does instead of stating this, is to mock the Christian's experiences.
However, a Christian's subjective experience of the spiritual realm is his story and is real to him. For the only way to view it is not with derision but with the same respect you pay to your grandparents when they tell you about a time before you were born, WITH SILENT AWE.
Originally posted: December 22, 2012 12:19 AM
Showing posts with label scientific method. Show all posts
Showing posts with label scientific method. Show all posts
20110830
Seligman on a God Who is Not Supernatural
"Like many Westerners, the idea of a transcendent purpose (or of a God who grounds such purpose) has always seemed untenable for me. Positive Psychology points to the way toward a secular approach to noble purpose and transcendent meaning — and even more astonishingly, toward a God who is not supernatural." - p. 14, M. Seligman, Authentic Happiness
A God who is not supernatural is nature in its splendour within Einstein's cosmic religion with trees as temples and forests as churches that Gorbachev respected.
Perhaps Seligman has heard of Gorbachev's quote.
Furthermore, it seems like he has heard of Matthew Fox.
So I am curious about Seligman because his "God who is not supernatural" echoes in the words of Gorbachev and Einstein.
Indeed it has a subtle ecumenical feel to it which is broad-minded and embraces all forms of human expression, including art and science. :)
Reference:
Matthew Fox on belief, chaos and fundamentalism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CfPqO30hHE
Gorbachev quote: I believe in the cosmos. All of us are linked to the cosmos. Look at the sun. If there is no sun, then we cannot exist. So nature is my god. To me, nature is sacred. Trees are my temples and forests are my cathedrals. -- "Nature Is My God" - interview with Fred Matser in Resurgence No. 184 (September-October 1997)
A God who is not supernatural is nature in its splendour within Einstein's cosmic religion with trees as temples and forests as churches that Gorbachev respected.
Perhaps Seligman has heard of Gorbachev's quote.
Furthermore, it seems like he has heard of Matthew Fox.
So I am curious about Seligman because his "God who is not supernatural" echoes in the words of Gorbachev and Einstein.
Indeed it has a subtle ecumenical feel to it which is broad-minded and embraces all forms of human expression, including art and science. :)
Reference:
Matthew Fox on belief, chaos and fundamentalism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CfPqO30hHE
Gorbachev quote: I believe in the cosmos. All of us are linked to the cosmos. Look at the sun. If there is no sun, then we cannot exist. So nature is my god. To me, nature is sacred. Trees are my temples and forests are my cathedrals. -- "Nature Is My God" - interview with Fred Matser in Resurgence No. 184 (September-October 1997)
20090219
The Unscientificness of "Evidence" for Weight Loss Product
"Scientific Study # 1: One recent 8-week randomized, double-blind placebo study of 30 moderately obese individuals yielded some interesting results. The group was broken up into three groups of 10.
Group 1 received just the calcium/potassium salt of 60% HCA extract from Garcinia cambogia. Group 2 received Garcinia cambogia extract, chromium polynicotinate, and Gymnema sylvestre extract. Group 3 received a placebo.
All individuals were placed on a 2000 kcal/day diet; ingested the recommended test supplements 3 times a day, 30 to 60 minutes before meals; and completed their supervised walking 5 times per week.
The results: Group 1 lost, on average, 12.1 pounds. Group 2 lost, on average, 14.99 pounds. Group 3 (just diet and exercise) lost, on average, 3.06 pounds. Obviously, these ingredients work together to increase fat oxidation and promote weight loss.
Scientific Study # 2: In this double blind study, 60 moderately obese individuals were assigned to the same three groups as study # 1. After 8 weeks, group 1 lost an average of 10 pounds. Group 2 lost 12.54 pounds. And the placebo group lost 3.53 pounds.
The overwhelming conclusion from both studies is that supplementation with the combination of hydroxycitric acid, niacin-bound chromium, and Gymnema Sylvestre Extract can help people with weight management."
The cohort size (number of people in study) for both examples is 30 and 60 respectively, which is many times smaller than what science demands (200+). Anyone who believes this ad needs to work more hours to pay for a diet one could make with help from a dietician for far cheaper!!!
As well, there is no statistical breakdown of weight-loss which adds up to the total of the group. Rather, averages are used. Furthermore, no standard deviation for each group is given.
When you compare the groups that lost weight, the difference in loss ranges from 2.54 to 2.89 pounds, which is not a big difference. The only conclusion one can make is that placebo diets do not help you lose weight. Another conclusion that can be made from a quick reading of the ingredients in the diets mentioned is that regularity is a normal part of any diet, that is, regular excretion of faeces guarantees that you will lose weight, probably due to dehydration.
Overall, this part of the ad for the diet is unscientific.
Group 1 received just the calcium/potassium salt of 60% HCA extract from Garcinia cambogia. Group 2 received Garcinia cambogia extract, chromium polynicotinate, and Gymnema sylvestre extract. Group 3 received a placebo.
All individuals were placed on a 2000 kcal/day diet; ingested the recommended test supplements 3 times a day, 30 to 60 minutes before meals; and completed their supervised walking 5 times per week.
The results: Group 1 lost, on average, 12.1 pounds. Group 2 lost, on average, 14.99 pounds. Group 3 (just diet and exercise) lost, on average, 3.06 pounds. Obviously, these ingredients work together to increase fat oxidation and promote weight loss.
Scientific Study # 2: In this double blind study, 60 moderately obese individuals were assigned to the same three groups as study # 1. After 8 weeks, group 1 lost an average of 10 pounds. Group 2 lost 12.54 pounds. And the placebo group lost 3.53 pounds.
The overwhelming conclusion from both studies is that supplementation with the combination of hydroxycitric acid, niacin-bound chromium, and Gymnema Sylvestre Extract can help people with weight management."
The cohort size (number of people in study) for both examples is 30 and 60 respectively, which is many times smaller than what science demands (200+). Anyone who believes this ad needs to work more hours to pay for a diet one could make with help from a dietician for far cheaper!!!
As well, there is no statistical breakdown of weight-loss which adds up to the total of the group. Rather, averages are used. Furthermore, no standard deviation for each group is given.
When you compare the groups that lost weight, the difference in loss ranges from 2.54 to 2.89 pounds, which is not a big difference. The only conclusion one can make is that placebo diets do not help you lose weight. Another conclusion that can be made from a quick reading of the ingredients in the diets mentioned is that regularity is a normal part of any diet, that is, regular excretion of faeces guarantees that you will lose weight, probably due to dehydration.
Overall, this part of the ad for the diet is unscientific.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)