Religion and Sience

The information is scattered, so I doubt there is a one stop source anywhere. But piecing it together, one COULD make a bibliography of many sources. IF that one bothered to remember where the fuck they learned it from :p

Still, responsibility is still in the eye of the beholder.
 
Well, he says it is a neurological condition, whereas the problem lies in confusing it with real. It is real, and it is a neurological condition. Therefore, accepting that it's just a part of their life now is a good response to such a condition. As this imbalance is not deadly, perhaps not enough research is done in the psychological implications of making an enemy with something that isn't a problem in the first place.

Perhaps it just creates another unnecessary imbalance that continues the "insanity" rather than end it. I notice schizo's don't get better with the current method, they just bypass it.

In other words, I don't see how Schizophrenia requires people being locked in a mental institution when the solution is self evident. Oh yeah, doctors want people to be sick so they can keep their job. Plus the whole fear of abnormality thing.

Look at religion. The main part people hate is being told that they'll go to hell if they don't be good. Well, let's take a look at the mental institution. If you're not normal, you're going to the psych ward. We're already comfortable with one method of establishing control, and you'll notice people more inclined to say that about themselves are the vast majority of America.

Is it ok to let one mindset rule the United States and not the other? Science before Religion? How about neither? Both? They say separate church from state, I say they only say that to shield you from the truth.
Do you mean that science shouldn't be included in the law of governing just like religion?

And as I (might) have said before, if you ask someone to do not do a particular thing without explaining WHY, the will go the wrong/opposite way.
 
True. I personally consider it as beliefs more than practice, i should do both but well.. haha


:lol:

?? There is no "Islamist" lol, there is only Muslim ;)

You're right.Missed that one =D.


Okay...guess i have a couple things to say now.lol.
To the guy who says i view religion ONLY as praying, wrong, praying is an important part of religion...as it's written. and if your not one of those rule bending christians (you most likely are considering i've never met a STRAIGHT UP christian) you would believe that as long as you worship god as he says to, your prayers will be answered. In your story "God" sent many chances for the priest to be saved, he was just stupid. Where were the chances to save my grandmother??? NOWHERE. okay moving on

God can't make the impossible come true only because you pray.That was the point of it all.I'm really sorry about your grandmother,but i didn't meant to say that she didn't take the chances she was given.Maybe the doctors dind't do all they could do,maybe she was at a point were physicall recovery was impossible.Christianism isn't about living forever.When someone dies we say that he or she is "in a better place" meaning he or she has gone to heaven.We believe that this world is important,but that even tough the body may decay,our soul is eternal,and heaven is the place where it rests.(sory if i sounded a little cursi or stuff,i can't help it sometimes).

My point with the story of the priest was that religious peopple don't just pray to get results we work hard for them.Sometimes getting to a satisfactory result is not possible.If your grandmother was beyond recovery then there is nothing that can be done,i see praying is an act of faith that is usefull when there is a matter of "tweaking the circumstances".But praying won't get you trough an exam,there are plenty of intelligent and respected religious peopple among the scientific comunity like blaise pascal,einstein (tough i believe he was agnostic instead of jewish wich means that he neither accept nor denies the existence of god),donald knuth....etc.Praying did't get them to pass their math's test that's impossible.

And to he who is trying to understand his religion through his own interpretation of it, thats why i said what i said. your twisting it, subconsciously or otherwise, which ONE is a sin in itself, and TWO only points out that not even the follower can believe all the craziness.

Hmm,no,it doesn't work like that.Religious texts are hundreds of years old,and had to undergo a lot of translations before they reached our hands,you cannot interpret them word by word,any religious person will tell you that (i'm speaking for the bible because it's my religious book,i don't know much about the others (unless you count the Tao Te King)).I understand atheists see religion as "peopple who pray to get their ressults",but it's not like that,religion (at least my own personal vision of it) is the seek for god,the search for rules that go far beyond what's considered 'legal' in a determinate society,rules that every person must follow to be in peace with the others.

Speaking of wich....¿Have you read something from Friedrich Nietszche? ¿Can you explain it to me word by word? ¿Or you just read the sentence "god is dead" and think that's all he ever did for philosophy? Some say,that that sentence refers to the time in wich it was written instead of an insult against religion.Philosophy is not an exact science either,if law was an exact science there would be no such thing as jurisprudence in your country.There isn't one single correct interpretation of religion.
 
^^i would agree he rehashes his idead many times, he only ever writes about two or three actual ideas, just writes them differently.
 
^^ I differ from that points of view,but i assume you do agree that taking things literally passed on to a better life centuries ago.
 
What's this book you are talking about dude? Sorry I'm not familiar with it. But I agree with what you stated about sex ;)

the book about evolution?
that's a brand-new book written/published in america, i don't think you can get it on the other hemishpere yet

i think we should make a distinction here between "sexually transmitable infections" (STIs) and the penile and colon infections that are caused by penis-in-anus sex (these infections could happen even if neither person has an STI)

also
in Leviticus, there is a rule against bestiality, because Syphilis and Ghonorrhea (spell?) come from people having sex with animals (The Plague Bacteria infects people when they come into contact with infected animals, but this is not the result of bestiality)
 
Schizophrenia is a neurological condition that causes one to confuse their internal dialogue for a separate entity and is generally caused by a chemical imbalance, not personal distress.

i already knew this ^, but i wasn't really talking about schizophrenia per se, i meant that religion can cause the specific type of personal stress that causes/exacerbates mental problems, and shizophrenia might go undiognosed a lot longer if the person really truly thinks the "other voice" is actually the "voice of God" whereas an atheist might notice something's wrong quicker and seek psych treatment earlier
 
Don't worry i can ask Amideast's library (An American school here for English teaching ) to order it for me :D

the copy in the local library here (City of Irving in the State of Texas in the United states of America) has a pic of somesort of raptor-looking dinosaur with leopard spots filling up the front cover
 
emm.. it's hard to get a book written in English, especially new ones, unless you go to bookseller and you ask him to order it, and then you will have to wait for some time, otherwise, you go to Amideast and see if it there, or you can order it too, but without paying anything, coz you won't own it lol. Almost everyone reads either in Arabic or in French here.
 
Do you mean that science shouldn't be included in the law of governing just like religion?

And as I (might) have said before, if you ask someone to do not do a particular thing without explaining WHY, the will go the wrong/opposite way.

Well, science says that if you jump from a tall building, you will injure yourself and probably get charged with attempted suicide. But if you didn't injure yourself, science is wrong in this case. The problem is with the generalization of such factors like endurance, strength, agility.

The legs can be used as suspension if you keep a bend at the knee, and bend upon contact. Cause your thighs to resist the stretch of muscle, and jump as high as you can on the rebound, bouncing off of your calves with your buttocks. Science proves that with the right physical conditioning, this could happen anywhere, anytime. But the generalization is that this is an attempted suicide, and that is where science fails.
 
Well, science says that if you jump from a tall building, you will injure yourself and probably get charged with attempted suicide. But if you didn't injure yourself, science is wrong in this case. The problem is with the generalization of such factors like endurance, strength, agility.

The legs can be used as suspension if you keep a bend at the knee, and bend upon contact. Cause your thighs to resist the stretch of muscle, and jump as high as you can on the rebound, bouncing off of your calves with your buttocks. Science proves that with the right physical conditioning, this could happen anywhere, anytime. But the generalization is that this is an attempted suicide, and that is where science fails.
What college did you attend?
 
So you're blaming science for anti-suicide legislation now?

I think science is to blame for alot of things people find bad. For example, why drink unfiltered water and theoretically get sick when you can drink filtered water and NEVER get sick? If you trained your body to handle the unfiltered, how many times are you gonna get sick before you stop getting sick?

Is it not sick to be exclusive?

What college did you attend?

I have my GED, I just know things.