TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

The bottom line is rooted in the physical and NOT in the spiritual.

The debate between those who hail spiritual existence as the source of the universe, hence promoting religious fervor for the faithful masses, and those who strip reality of the magic of faith, and submit to the dry, factual, scientific physical nature of reality, is generations old. This debate affects the majority of aspects of modern civilization, as its fallouts impact the path of our civilization's progress. Yet as evidence is gathered and compiled to prove AND EDUCATE about reality, it becomes evident that FAITH is secondary to KNOWLEDGE, and that SCIENCE precedes RELIGION, and that HOPE can and should be a matter of real prospect based on calculated input. Faith and ceremony as means for comforting and consoling, of easing the pain of troubled souls, and for organizing an orchestrated pattern of tradition, of imagining a supreme parent figure who bears the real responsibility in a divine form etc... All these are constructs of the human mind. The mind, however, is a contruct of chemical and physical building blocks. Can anyone prove otherwise, without resorting to faith?

Topics: religion science

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jan 29 2012: Daniel

    Your comment is exactly why I need science s explanation. You move freely through words and because they make sense to you, you think your words are truth and fact. We all speak from the position of (I am right), even though I know that some of the things I believe are incorrect. At least admit that you may be incorrect about your beliefs.

    ""The plant has something different than the stone. It is alive. It grows.""
    Dirt, essentially the building block of stones, has more microbial life in a shovel scoop than there are people on this planet. The stone, to me, is just like our own skeletal system. It provides a structure on which the more fleshy systems operate. Are you suggesting the skeletal system may not be alive? I hope not.

    ""Mankind is different than the stone, the plant and the animal. We have the material element. We have the life element. We have feelings as well. What we have over and above these first three things is self-consciousness and thinking.""
    You have to get in back of the line of people trying to tell me what animal has "consciousness" or not. Really well trained scientists, in all fields, and the religions have been discussing "consciousness" for a very long time, and a conclusion is not drawn.

    I think it is safe to say that humans have an ability to recognize patterns. If you are thinking of an elephant with polka dots, you are merely placing a pattern over an already existing form. It's called absurdity and it doesn't make that elephant or the idea real. We need this type of ability in order to survive in a constantly changing environment. (Evolution) Although I as well think that our ability to think and create is astonishing, I do not "guild the lily" by adding some unobservable outside force and then use empty arguments as proof.

    (" it doesn't make that elephant or the idea real.") The electrical contacts, the chemical exchanges, even thought itself is very real and can be used in some way, but not the polka dotted elephant.
    • Jan 30 2012: Stephen,

      Observation and thinking are the simple tool to gain knowledge. I am all for the scientific method. .. never said otherwise.
      Agree on the fact that dirt is full of bacteria. A stone however is still not alive. The mineral element is lifeless. Bacteria of course is alive but they are not the mineral either. They are also sharing the living, reproducing, growing forces that make them different than the mineral. As plant, as animal, as mankind also is. Bones are also "alive" of course. But they do heal far more slowly than skin for example. Nerves are also slower to heal which might suggest that nerves are less "alive" than blood or muscle tissue. Its a question of degrees. As a child heals faster than an old person. There is a strong "living activity" going on.
      If anyone tries to tell you that consciousness does not exist, then ask them how thinking exists. You cannot deny your own thinking activity. That would be a fatal contradiction. We think... and our consciousness is the stage where we think. It is also the stage where our feelings arise. Feelings that we can analyze with our.... once again... thinking !! ... although you may not be very "conscious" of it.
      As for the patterns of already existing forms. Of course we build our thoughts upon existing patterns... all the time. But there must also be new ideas that come into being.. otherwise there would be no development in the world, things would be extremely simple. Observations taken up in our thinking activity makes new inventions, new theories to work out, new areas of exploration.Of course, the fact that I can put two or more already existing concepts together doesn't make the idea "real" I never claimed that either. But through the nature of our thinking we are ...taking part... in a creative process in the world.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.