Yes, but we need to think about what we consider respect-worthy, whether it is the idea itself or the thinking that has gone into it. When a scientific consensus is overturned by new evidence, we don't stop respecting the previous work but we do stop respecting the idea.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
Yes ... but that's because the idea has been conclusively disproven. (Hence the lack of respect for flat-earthism). I don't think you can get to that type of conclusiveness in many cases of wrong ideas in philosophy/social sciences
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AkivaMCohen
This is true. But I still don't respect ideas unless there is some evidence of their soundness. And God is not really a philosophical or social science issue. He either exists or not. That is a scientific question.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
We really do need to have that debate we talked about a while back
Once my custody trial is done, we're going to have it out in Aero, you hear?
But no, it's not a scientific question at all, since science is the study of the existent universe and ...2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AkivaMCohen @HPluckrose
in "God" we're referencing an entity defined as the creator of that universe; you can't measure something outside of a system using tools that are internal to that system. God's existence or non-existence is something to be addressed through logic & philosophy, not science
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AkivaMCohen @HPluckrose
Separate from whether god exists or not, science can address whether some phenomenon is attributable to god, right?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Juris_dudence @AkivaMCohen
Most importantly, from the perspective of those who believe in an afterlife, is there any evidence of a soul which can survive the death of the brain and go on to live in a different form?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @Juris_dudence
Descartes seemed to think so. But I'd say that's one of those issues that rests on revelation
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AkivaMCohen @HPluckrose
It would thrill me to no end if science ever found a way to prove/disprove that.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Juris_dudence @HPluckrose
It's literally impossible; science deals in the physical, the soul is asserted to not be physical. Science doesn't have the tools to say one way or the other (beyond "there's no scientific evidence for it"). As Stephen Jay Gould put it, these are non-overlapping magisteria
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Richard Dawkins counters this in the first chapter of The God Delusion and argues that they are scientific claims.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @Juris_dudence
I read that a while back. Remember not being particularly impressed with his arguments, but it was years ago, so I don't quite remember the specifics of why
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.