rdtedm, on Friday, August 15th, 2008, 9:51 AM, said:
The problem with using the words "objective" and "reality" is that they are also humanly defined concepts.
objective = mutually verifiable. objective reality = truth about the world that is mutually verifiable external to and not subject to what an individual believes or feels. those are straightforward concepts that there is certainly no problem with in terms of the subject of this thread.
Who are we to say that seeing is believing, and that science as we know it must explain everything?
i didn't say either of those things.
There is partial evidence of evolution
say goodbye to your credibility.
but do you really believe that through random genetic mutations we have come from microscopic bacteria to advanced, intelligent, and intricate humans?
i'm not sure why anyone wouldn't. even for a religious person to think it's impossible would just be placing limits on god. also, note that while mutations are random, evolution by natural selection is not. it is the opposite of random.
We are capable of making decisions, hypothesizing, dreaming, thinking, reacting, and of having emotions.
yeah so are dolphins & chimps, to a somewhat lesser extent.
Science, of course, is undoubtedly the most solid way we have about thinking of the world. But does that make it the only way that we can attempt to explain what we see and observe?
if you'd like to propose another way that's of any use at all for anyone other than the individual employing it i'd certainly listen.
To other, God and other religious beliefs are objective truth.
you mean subjective, of course. faith by definition is about as far from objectivity as you can get.
It's about perception and belief. If you choose to believe that everything in this world is scientific and worldly explainable, then that is your path. Like BG said, it's really up to the person whether or not they want to let a little wonder in their lives.
what does wonder have to do with discovering truth about objective reality? as i said it may be helpful in discovering personal values, but those are entirely subjective. wonder is utterly useless in determining if NDE's are proof of an afterlife.also science and a sense of wonder are obviously not mutually exclusive. atheist scientists are typically just as awed by the universe and reverent of their place in it as religious people, frequently much moreso.