43 Minutes Which Could Change Your Life And This Forum - Science & Religion

[JDave]

I never have seen any conflict between science and the LDS religion. So I won't waste my time with your video.

Does that mean if you don't see a conflict between what church leaders say and your own view of the gospel then you don't waste your time on General Conference?  There is always a chance to learn, whether from opposing views or similar views.  It all depends on our attitude.  I guess that comes full circle, though, because if you view something as a waste of time and go into it with that attitude -- it likely will be a waste of time.

[canard78]

I never have seen any conflict between science and the LDS religion. So I won't waste my time with your video.

Would this be an innapropriate reply?

2 Nep 28:27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more!

If that isn't then this may well be:

"Mental laziness is the vice of men, especially with reference to divine things. Men seem to think that because inspiration and revelation are factors in connection with the things of God, therefore the pain and stress of mental effort are not required; that by some means these elements act somewhat as Elijah’s ravens and feed us without effort on our part. To escape this effort, this mental stress to know the things that are, men raise all too readily the ancient bar-“Thus far shalt thou come, but no farther.” Man cannot hope to understand the things of God, they plead, or penetrate those things which he has left shrouded in mystery. “Be thou content with the simple faith that accepts without question. To believe, and accept the ordinances, and then live the moral law will doubtless bring men unto salvation; why then should man strive and trouble himself to understand? Much study is still a weariness of the flesh.” So men reason; and just now it is much in fashion to laud “the simple faith;” which is content to believe without understanding, or even without much effort to understand. And doubtless many good people regard this course as indicative of reverence-this plea in bar of effort- “thus far and no farther.”…This sort of “reverence” is easily simulated, and is of such flattering unction, and so pleasant to follow- “soul take thine ease”- that without question it is very often simulated; and falls into the same category as the simulated humility couched in “I don’t know,” which so often really means “I don’t care, and do not intend to trouble myself to find out.”

Elder B.H. Roberts, The Seventy’s Course of Theology, vol. V (Salt Lake City: The Deseret News, 1912), pg. v -

The video is excellent. It won't be a waste of time.

[canard78]

http://www.lds.org/liahona/2012/07/always-in-the-middle?lang=eng

I assume you are familiar with this talk, but posted it for those who aren't.

Actually I wasn't. But I love it Edited August 19, 2013 by canard78

[thesometimesaint]

D&C 93:24 defines truth as knowedge of things as they are, as they were, and as they are to come.  For the moment, let's assume that "truth" means what the D&C says it means.

 

Arround 12:30 in your video, Rorty says:

 

Nowadays since the development of modern science, religious belief and scientific beliefs have become tools for doing different jobs.  Scientific beliefs help us predict and control events in space and time.  This job used to be done by cosmogonist hypothesis pervaded by priests and prophets, but it can now be done better.

 

If "truth" is knowledge of things as they really are, then according to what Rorty is saying, science does a better job of helping us understand the truth.

 

 

As much as I appreciate science, and I do A LOT, science can't help me understand truth. What it can do is help me understand facts. The two are not necessarily the same thing.

[TAO]

I never have seen any conflict between science and the LDS religion. So I won't waste my time with your video.

 

God is the ultimate scientist, many of his ways are beyond us currently, but we humans continue to learn new scientific principles all the time.

 

Let me explain what I think mfb meant by 'conflict', in a tiny bit of a different way.  The best example is actually illusions of various sorts.  For instance, what do they say in car mirrors... 'Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear'.  Why do they say this?  Because how we interpret what we see looking in one direction, and how we interpret what we see looking in another direction conflict.  And so, we develop a resolution (that is, that objects in the mirror may be closer than they appear).  Is this necessarily the only resolution?  No.  We could develop thousands of different alternative resolutions.  This is just the one we chose.  We choose to change how we interpret our sight so that way we are able to bring resolution to the conflict.  By conflict (in philosophical terms), it doesn't mean that something is irreconcilable.  It just means we are developing a resolution.  There are several issues where what is said in mainstream scientific opinion and religious speech conflict, that is, they seem to disagree with each other.  And so, we develop resolutions in various ways, so that way the conflicts disappear.  And there isn't anything to be criticized for when creating resolutions - almost everybody does it believe it or not. So if people criticize you for it, just point out that they are doing the same thing on other topics.  Like nearly all of us do.

 

To put it more succinctly, rather than change what we believe is correct, we change how we believe it's correct instead.

Edited August 19, 2013 by TAO

[mfbukowski]

Would this be an innapropriate reply?

In my book any reply would be inappropriate.  I usually avoid militant defenders of ignorance.

[mfbukowski]

Well I thought I would give this a bump and see if anyone wants to jump in.

 

I noticed that Kevin Graham is still saying very stupid things about me on the other board and would like to have him comment on this video if he sees it.

 

But I don't want to discuss it over there.  It's too distracting having groundlings throwing rotten fruit while you are trying to have a discussion.