Theism is Primitive Thinking

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by PsychoticEpisode, Oct 16, 2009.

  1. glaucon tending tangentially Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    Mod Hat,

    Pipes, NMS:

    The topic at hand is thinking, not spirituality. Try to stay on topic.
    Further posts that aren't directly related to the OP will be edited or deleted.

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    By the same token, all the trappings of this apparently wonderful knowledge is simply humour somewhere down the track.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Pipes75 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    251
    To the mod,

    I appoligize if you disagree with my thoughts, however:

    The topic is 'Theism is Primitive Thinking'

    To understand how theism thinking applies, it can not be taken in a physical form of thinking, it has to be taken spiritually!

    If the only form of thinking that is in question is logical thinking in the physical realities we live - then yes theism would be primitive.

    But luckily for us, not all thinking needs to be logical to be valid. I can see why some of those in a science forum would not agree with my thoughts, but what harm is their in discussing the matter in further detail?
    Just because many are afraid of the things they don't understand, that doesn't mean what they don't understand doesn't exist!!!

    General Philosphy, with regards to Theism - I can't imagine a debate that doesn't include spirituality. If Spirituality is not included, then the topic is pointless. You can't understand the significance of a spiritual importance without discussing spirituality.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. mike47 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,117
    So how are you going to elaborate in the sphere of these thoughts ?!!!.
     
  8. mike47 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,117
    Theism in 2009 is not a primitive thinking and many people with PHDs in science are thesists .
     
  9. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Not only is it primitive, it's unscientific. Scientists who believe have to separate the two worlds entirely, like non-overlapping magisteria. It's intellectually dishonest, but then again, many scientists work in fields that don't much inform their religious thinking.
     
  10. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    actually any scientist who looks up at the night sky and describes it as breath taking or beautiful is also living in two worlds
    :shrug:
     
  11. mike47 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,117
    Criticizing scientists without being a scientist ?.......:shrug::..!.
     
  12. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Nonsense, there is nothing about science that precludes a sense of wonder about the natural world. In fact science only enhances it. Without science, the night sky would be full of pretty lights. Now we know they are actually stars and that they are an incomprehensible distance away from us and getting farther away all the time, and that there might be planets around those stars.
     
  13. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    is that like criticizing theist without being a theist?
     
  14. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    That's precisley it.

    Or more precisely, there's nothing about science that includes a sense of wonder about the natural world. Scientists, much like any other (human) professional have a division (albeit perhaps a short one in some tragic cases) between their work and personal lives.
     
  15. Doreen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    Let's get some specific examples of the various types of thinking on the 'page'.

    Do we mean thinking in words? If so, write out a few of the different kinds of thinking and let's discuss from there.

    Primitive thinking looks like _______________________

    Modern thinking looks like ______________________
     
  16. Doreen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    I believe, more and more, 'wonder' would be considered a qualia. This is a philosophical term, but it has slid out into the neurosciences.
     
  17. glaucon tending tangentially Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    I'm not going to; they should be obvious.
     
  18. glaucon tending tangentially Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502


    Total garbage. There's no such thing as 'non-physical thinking'.
    Again,try to provide evidence.



    Then you have the answer.

    'Theism' and 'spirituality' are distinct terms, and as such, need not be necessarily be simultaneously discussed.

    If the notion of focus is difficult for you, feel free to participate in other subfora.
     
  19. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,356
    Yes there is.
    I suggest you google "Emotion Science"...
    You'll find such things as: THIS, THIS and even THIS, being the Wiki article on emotion which clearly indicates some of the scientific theories behind emotion.

    There are many more such links if you ever had the decency to look.
     
  20. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    Perhaps I didn't express myself clearly enough.

    Science, as a discipline, has no requirement for wonder. Th individual, some of whom might be scientists, certainly does.
     
  21. mike47 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,117
    What is obvious is that many folks with PHDs in science from math to physics.....etc are Theists and not Atheists . So it is clear that a scientist with a PHD in 2009 is not following primitive thinking like Jesus , Moses, Abraham......etc ..........

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ...................

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ......!.
     
  22. Pipes75 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    251
    Creative thinking is equally important to logical thinking.
    Creative thinking is in a more spirtual sence, where as logical thinking is in the physical.
    Evidence is a part of the physical. You won't find physical evidence in a spirtual message, it just doesn't work that way! Some have tried to interpret the spirtual metephores so they can apply the symbolic understandings to the physical realities - but we all have different perceptions, so the many different interpretations is irrelevant, it's only the One answer that has many different meanings that matters!
    Theism is just one of many ways that an individual might find spirtuality. You don't need to be theist to find spirtuality though! So I agree, you don't need theism to discuss spirtuality, however you can't discuss Theism without the spirtuality, because its one of the many spirtual paths.

    As for scientists. They don't have to be theist, but the brilliant ones are in touch with more then just the physical, but they look for physical evidence to support their understandings. Not finding evidence does not change their belief, finding new evidence will change their interpretation of the belief, but the belief is still the same. The elite scientists understand that the spirtual side is full of metephores and symbolizim. And yes they do generally seperate both sides, but not because they contradict themselves, but rather because they are looking for both sides of the truth.
     
  23. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    That's not true at all, they are perfectly compatible. The supernatural, however, is not consistent with science.
     

Share This Page