The difference between science and religion

[BADecker]

If you took all the religions in the world and destroyed them, in 1000 years there would be entirely new religions, completely different from the old religions...

If you took all the science in the world and destroyed it... in 1000 years there would be EXACTLY THE SAME SCIENCE

Mathematics is not something invented by humans, it is discovered by humans... mathematics is the same in any language, on any planet... 1 + 1 = 2 is a provable concept and does not change based on societal norms or which deities they currently worship

Newton and Leibniz are credited with the co-discovery of calculus... they did not invent it, they both discovered it at the same time... math/science is universal, religion is not

That said; civilization will continue to develop things and that in science there will be new approaches to objects about the world and new mindsets that is different from the current like it will be viewed with different aspects and dimensions while religion's difference is that people will continue to believe in different things and that in return would have different impact about human behavior because of new beliefs.

However, the above is totally wrong.

1+1 never equals 2.

Why not? Because there are no two things in the universe that are the same. Mathematics and language are completely abstract.

For example. Stand a huge male elephant next to a tiny baby elephant. You might say 1 elephant + another elephant equals two elephants. You would also be correct, but only in an abstract way. Why? Because in reality, the elephant's can't be added together, because they are different. They will always be one-huge-male-elephant plus one-tiny-baby-elephant, because they will always be different... even if the tiny baby elephant grows up.

It's like trying to add apples and oranges. You can't add apples and oranges. If you call them both fruit, you have made the whole thing into an abstraction.

Because of this, mathematics will always be flawed regarding reality. The flaw is not so important when considering something as simple as 1+1. But when you get into complex math like E=mc², the complexity starts to break down regarding its relationship with reality.

This is why relativity and many other complex mathematical theories remain as theories. They can't match reality enough to say that they are facts rather than theories. The reason is, because math is abstract. 1+1=2 doesn't exist, because there are no two things in the whole universe that are exactly the same. Even two electrons are different regarding their locations in space, if nothing else. So, they are always 1+1, never 2, except in the abstract.

Science is entirely abstract. It is a "picture" of reality that we use to get an idea of what is going on in reality. But since the picture is flawed, when we try to twist reality to match the picture, we start to destroy reality... or at least the perfect balance reality operates in.

Traditional religion, not having more than simple math involved within it, doesn't destroy reality. Rather, it enhances peoples' lives within reality.

[Moloch]

It has come to my attention that the story in the bible about Moses and the burning bush has a scientific explanation...

According to the bible, Moses comes across an acacia bush which is on fire at the base of Mount Horeb (commonly believed to be Mt Sinai, Egypt).  Moses then hears God talking to him, and has a short conversation with God.


Now, I'd like to get into the science of what happened that day...

85% of all acacia species tested contain psychoactive chemicals:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Acacia_species_known_to_contain_psychoactive_alkaloids

The most likely candidate species for Moses' acacia bush would be Vachellia Nilotica, the "Egyptian Acacia", aka gum arabic tree
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vachellia_nilotica

This species of acacia has been found to contain DMT & 5-MeO-DMT, 2 of the most powerful psychedelic/hallucinogens known to man.  DMT is known to cause hallucinations similar to a near death experience, where people often have conversations with "entities" (call them gods if you want, Moses did)

If this bush was burning, it would emit more than enough DMT in the smoke to make anyone downwind have hallucinations



To sum up, I'll give the religious vs scientific explanations:
Religious: Moses spoke with God
Science: Moses was high on DMT and hallucinated that he spoke with God

[Spendulus]

It has come to my attention that the story in the bible about Moses and the burning bush has a scientific explanation...

According to the bible, Moses comes across an acacia bush which is on fire at the base of Mount Horeb (commonly believed to be Mt Sinai, Egypt).  Moses then hears God talking to him, and has a short conversation with God.


Now, I'd like to get into the science of what happened that day...

85% of all acacia species tested contain psychoactive chemicals:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Acacia_species_known_to_contain_psychoactive_alkaloids

The most likely candidate species for Moses' acacia bush would be Vachellia Nilotica, the "Egyptian Acacia", aka gum arabic tree
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vachellia_nilotica

This species of acacia has been found to contain DMT & 5-MeO-DMT, 2 of the most powerful psychedelic/hallucinogens known to man.  DMT is known to cause hallucinations similar to a near death experience, where people often have conversations with "entities" (call them gods if you want, Moses did)

If this bush was burning, it would emit more than enough DMT in the smoke to make anyone downwind have hallucinations



To sum up, I'll give the religious vs scientific explanations:
Religious: Moses spoke with God
Science: Moses was high on DMT and hallucinated that he spoke with God

I believe a fire would have destroyed the chemical DMT, instead of releasing it.

This is not like weed where an elevated temperature is required to release the psychoactive properties.

(But I am not very knowledgable about this. Could be wrong...)

However leaving that aside, assuming he was munching on those leaves or something.

So what? Many religions have recognized psychoactive substances as being related to the spiritual.

That doesn't get you where you'd like to be in terms of conclusions.

[o_e_l_e_o]

-snip-

You hear that, guys? Einstein was wrong because elephants can be different sizes. Groundbreaking stuff here.

So what? Many religions have recognized psychoactive substances as being related to the spiritual.

You have your conclusions back to front. Science has recognized that psychoactive substances cause hallucinations. The fact that people choose to interpret those hallucinations as religious in nature, tells you more about the irrationality of religion than anything else.

[Mysterium 14]

The fundamental difference is that science is able to challenge all the axioms and the facts on which it is based. Scientific knowledge can sometimes be disproved. Religion is based on unsubstantiated, unverifiable axioms (postulates, dogmas), the comprehension of which is believed to be inaccessible to the human mind, and therefore they are not investigated and tested. Religion claims to be complete, absolute truth.

[Spendulus]

-snip-

You hear that, guys? Einstein was wrong because elephants can be different sizes. Groundbreaking stuff here.

So what? Many religions have recognized psychoactive substances as being related to the spiritual.

You have your conclusions back to front. Science has recognized that psychoactive substances cause hallucinations. The fact that people choose to interpret those hallucinations as religious in nature, tells you more about the irrationality of religion than anything else.

I don't think so. Not defending religion here, but the user reports of psychoactive substances effects go far beyond "hallucinations." That's a pretty strictly defined term in psychology. Reported effects include deep insights, feelings of being one-with-the-universe, etc, etc. They explicitly include experiences which said users describe as "spiritual."

I just don't think Moloch can successfully argue against religion on the basis of some of the events described in the books being attributable to psychoactive, instead of some pure mental state or whatever.

There are many ways to argue this issue well but this isn't one of them.

[phdilanuom]

Religion is keeping total faith in someone or something. No developments. No adaptations with the time. You can not question it. You need to believe it. Religion can never create a free thinker.
BUT the science is seeking evidence. Frequent Developments and adaptations. It can make a man a free thinker. I would have believed a religion if there is no science.   

[Spendulus]

....
Or the guy just had his schizophrenic episode.

If you talk to your God, you are religious.
If your God talks back to you, you are insane.

All people who claim they hear or see spirits are mentally ill.

Brain malfunction that is all it is.  Drug induced or not, still a malfunction.

I wouldn't go that far.

For example, in the past people may have construed various physical phenomena as indicative of spirits. Examples.

Sun dogs and sun pillars
Lunar halos
various types of "ball lightning"

... you get the point ...

And there are various geological areas that naturally emit rather odd sounds.

Just about all of this has now been explained scientifically, but there is nothing dumb or stupid about such phenomena in the past, being explained in the context of the knowledge of the time.

In fact, the entire world view in the past was radically different. Such a simple thing as taking a sweater off in the dark, seeing all the sparks of static electricity that occur, that might be construed as spirits. Also spontaneous generation. On and on.

Don't think for a split second you are smarter or wiser than those people of those times. You simply have different frames of reference.

A subset of people who claim they hear or see spirits are mentally ill. That is a far higher percentage today than in the dim past, of course.

[Moloch]

I don't think so. Not defending religion here, but the user reports of psychoactive substances effects go far beyond "hallucinations." That's a pretty strictly defined term in psychology. Reported effects include deep insights, feelings of being one-with-the-universe, etc, etc. They explicitly include experiences which said users describe as "spiritual."

I just don't think Moloch can successfully argue against religion on the basis of some of the events described in the books being attributable to psychoactive, instead of some pure mental state or whatever.

There are many ways to argue this issue well but this isn't one of them.

Who said I was arguing against religion?  I simply pointed out the difference in viewpoint between religious and scientific interpretations of this particular event

Many people who have taken psychedelics consider them "spiritual" events just like Moses did.  From the reports I have heard about DMT, there is no doubt in my mind this is what happened that day.  DMT is said to be a profoundly mystical experience... the type that could start a religion... particularly if a person didn't know they were taking drugs, and thought the hallucinations were real


Anyway, I think you are wrong... I would definitely argue that a person who "spoke to god" through drug use was... unreliable to say the least

Would you believe someone these days who took LSD then claimed they spoke to god?  Of course not... why is Moses any different?

[jbjoyce]

If you took all the religions in the world and destroyed them, in 1000 years there would be entirely new religions, completely different from the old religions...

If you took all the science in the world and destroyed it... in 1000 years there would be EXACTLY THE SAME SCIENCE

Mathematics is not something invented by humans, it is discovered by humans... mathematics is the same in any language, on any planet... 1 + 1 = 2 is a provable concept and does not change based on societal norms or which deities they currently worship

Newton and Leibniz are credited with the co-discovery of calculus... they did not invent it, they both discovered it at the same time... math/science is universal, religion is not

i never arguing about the religion, if you have faith with your religion you never change what they believe,it's the same with science they can discover many element in this world what they experiment they can believe in this

[Spendulus]

I don't think so. Not defending religion here, but the user reports of psychoactive substances effects go far beyond "hallucinations." That's a pretty strictly defined term in psychology. Reported effects include deep insights, feelings of being one-with-the-universe, etc, etc. They explicitly include experiences which said users describe as "spiritual."

I just don't think Moloch can successfully argue against religion on the basis of some of the events described in the books being attributable to psychoactive, instead of some pure mental state or whatever.

There are many ways to argue this issue well but this isn't one of them.

Who said I was arguing against religion?  I simply pointed out the difference in viewpoint between religious and scientific interpretations of this particular event

Many people who have taken psychedelics consider them "spiritual" events just like Moses did.  From the reports I have heard about DMT, there is no doubt in my mind this is what happened that day.  DMT is said to be a profoundly mystical experience... the type that could start a religion... particularly if a person didn't know they were taking drugs, and thought the hallucinations were real


Anyway, I think you are wrong... I would definitely argue that a person who "spoke to god" through drug use was... unreliable to say the least

Would you believe someone these days who took LSD then claimed they spoke to god?  Of course not... why is Moses any different?

Assuming the myth has some basis in fact, after this experience Moses went and wrote some profoundly simple rules defining good and bad behavior on some stone tablets. That sets him pretty far apart from today's drug user.

[Moloch]

I don't think so. Not defending religion here, but the user reports of psychoactive substances effects go far beyond "hallucinations." That's a pretty strictly defined term in psychology. Reported effects include deep insights, feelings of being one-with-the-universe, etc, etc. They explicitly include experiences which said users describe as "spiritual."

I just don't think Moloch can successfully argue against religion on the basis of some of the events described in the books being attributable to psychoactive, instead of some pure mental state or whatever.

There are many ways to argue this issue well but this isn't one of them.

Who said I was arguing against religion?  I simply pointed out the difference in viewpoint between religious and scientific interpretations of this particular event

Many people who have taken psychedelics consider them "spiritual" events just like Moses did.  From the reports I have heard about DMT, there is no doubt in my mind this is what happened that day.  DMT is said to be a profoundly mystical experience... the type that could start a religion... particularly if a person didn't know they were taking drugs, and thought the hallucinations were real


Anyway, I think you are wrong... I would definitely argue that a person who "spoke to god" through drug use was... unreliable to say the least

Would you believe someone these days who took LSD then claimed they spoke to god?  Of course not... why is Moses any different?

Assuming the myth has some basis in fact, after this experience Moses went and wrote some profoundly simple rules defining good and bad behavior on some stone tablets. That sets him pretty far apart from today's drug user.

You must know different drug users than I do...

Ever listen to a guy named Alan Watts, or Terrence McKenna?

Ever listen to a story from anyone who has done DMT?

They all pretty much sound like Jesus, Moses, etc... it's something the drug does to you

If you are interested, here is one example from Terrence McKenna (time queued for you)... but take it with a grain of salt because every description varies a bit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNVdMATZ0_c&t=368s

[BADecker]

I don't think so. Not defending religion here, but the user reports of psychoactive substances effects go far beyond "hallucinations." That's a pretty strictly defined term in psychology. Reported effects include deep insights, feelings of being one-with-the-universe, etc, etc. They explicitly include experiences which said users describe as "spiritual."

I just don't think Moloch can successfully argue against religion on the basis of some of the events described in the books being attributable to psychoactive, instead of some pure mental state or whatever.

There are many ways to argue this issue well but this isn't one of them.

Who said I was arguing against religion?  I simply pointed out the difference in viewpoint between religious and scientific interpretations of this particular event

Many people who have taken psychedelics consider them "spiritual" events just like Moses did.  From the reports I have heard about DMT, there is no doubt in my mind this is what happened that day.  DMT is said to be a profoundly mystical experience... the type that could start a religion... particularly if a person didn't know they were taking drugs, and thought the hallucinations were real


Anyway, I think you are wrong... I would definitely argue that a person who "spoke to god" through drug use was... unreliable to say the least

Would you believe someone these days who took LSD then claimed they spoke to god?  Of course not... why is Moses any different?

Assuming the myth has some basis in fact, after this experience Moses went and wrote some profoundly simple rules defining good and bad behavior on some stone tablets. That sets him pretty far apart from today's drug user.

You must know different drug users than I do...

Ever listen to a guy named Alan Watts, or Terrence McKenna?

Ever listen to a story from anyone who has done DMT?

They all pretty much sound like Jesus, Moses, etc... it's something the drug does to you

If you are interested, here is one example from Terrence McKenna (time queued for you)... but take it with a grain of salt because every description varies a bit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNVdMATZ0_c&t=368s

Government is controlled by its desire for money.

Keeping people mildly sick keeps bringing in the money.

Surely we wouldn't want a cure fore every disease; no money for government or doctors.

Massive amounts of DMT cure everything.

No wonder government and the medical try to keep us away from pot and other hallucinogens.




I mean, play games with goofy ideas, right?

[FortFC]

Being a believer in 21-th century is more than a strange thing to do, of course,i'm up here for the science!

[Shaftdel]

Science is the sum of knowledge gained from methods, principles and laws. Though proven but is ssubject to change at anytime.
While religion is a way life of people with a particular system of faith and worship due to what they believe.

[Moloch]

Massive amounts of DMT cure everything.

No wonder government and the medical try to keep us away from pot and other hallucinogens.

According to Terrence McKenna, someone stole a 55-gallon drum of DMT from the Army (with a dosage ~20mg, that is millions of doses)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN3NLeKMImk&t=81s
"The US Army was trying to develop and aerosol artillery shell which would land in a vietnamese village, drive everyone nuts, and you could send your people in and take over in all the confusion"

[Spendulus]

Massive amounts of DMT cure everything.

No wonder government and the medical try to keep us away from pot and other hallucinogens.

According to Terrence McKenna, someone stole a 55-gallon drum of DMT from the Army (with a dosage ~20mg, that is millions of doses)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN3NLeKMImk&t=81s
"The US Army was trying to develop and aerosol artillery shell which would land in a vietnamese village, drive everyone nuts, and you could send your people in and take over in all the confusion"

Now I'm confused. You are supporting science instead of religion by reference to a leading advocate of pseudoscience?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_McKenna
McKenna formulated a concept about the nature of time based on fractal patterns he claimed to have discovered in the I Ching, which he called novelty theory,[3][5] proposing this predicted the end of time in the year 2012.[5][6][7][8] His promotion of novelty theory and its connection to the Maya calendar is credited as one of the factors leading to the widespread beliefs about 2012 eschatology.[9] Novelty theory is considered pseudoscience.[10][11]

[Spendulus]

....

Moses was mentally ill because he 'heard" God talking to him or he made the whole thing up just to gain power over other poor schmucks.

We have plenty of "Moses like" conditions in mental hospitals today.  Mentally ill people claim all kinds of unbelievable things, and when you talk to them they sound very intelligent and well spoken; and yet they are insane.

Medicine has made progress in the last 2000 years so we can identify these conditions.  Back in Moses times, nobody knew what paranoia or schizophrenia is and how to identify it.

You are using these terms loosely and not in the correct sense scientifically. You're likely looking for "paranoid schizophenia."

I have not seen evidence of paranoid schizophrenia in the handed down reports of behavior of Moses.

People in mental hospitals ..... let's just say that they are the extremes of the spectrum of mental illness. Today, most are at home taking drugs, which control their illness until they forget to take them, and then perhaps they go shoot up a Schoo.

[BADecker]

....

Moses was mentally ill because he 'heard" God talking to him or he made the whole thing up just to gain power over other poor schmucks.

We have plenty of "Moses like" conditions in mental hospitals today.  Mentally ill people claim all kinds of unbelievable things, and when you talk to them they sound very intelligent and well spoken; and yet they are insane.

Medicine has made progress in the last 2000 years so we can identify these conditions.  Back in Moses times, nobody knew what paranoia or schizophrenia is and how to identify it.

You are using these terms loosely and not in the correct sense scientifically. You're likely looking for "paranoid schizophenia."

I have not seen evidence of paranoid schizophrenia in the handed down reports of behavior of Moses.

People in mental hospitals ..... let's just say that they are the extremes of the spectrum of mental illness. Today, most are at home taking drugs, which control their illness until they forget to take them, and then perhaps they go shoot up a Schoo[l].

LOL.  Having hallucinations and delusions is a textbook example of schizophrenia.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/schizophrenia/index.shtml

He did have delusion/hallucination of talking to God.   So the only question is how severe were his symptoms.

LOL! You were there, right? The Proof for the existence of God thread shows that God exists. So, there isn't any big deal in the idea of God talking to Moses.

However...
just to show you how off-base you are, the bush could have been next to a rock formation with special vibrational qualities. Some joker could have been hiding in the rock formation and tricking Moses. Moses didn't have to be hallucinating. He just might have been tricked.

So, here you are, trying to trick us into thinking you know just what went on with Moses. You are just the kind of joker who would have tried to trick Moses if you could have. And now you are trying to trick us into thinking you have even a hint of what you are talking about.

Everything you say points to your lack of any real science behind you. You talk just like it is all religion for you. And that is the trouble with most people. They are essentially all mixed up regarding the relationship between science and the religious talk they spout.

[mrmikeo]

Well, as a religious person me who loves science I have never found the two to come into contradiction. I’ve always viewed science to be the study and search for how things came to be, whereas religion focuses as to the “Why” or the purpose of everything around us.