The Problem with Science as a Substitute

[nereas]

Stem cell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good point. This political issue is the flip side of abortion.

Both of these issues are quite irrational and emotional, and are related to the unborn.

The major social issue is whether the unborn have any rights, and whether the society therefore has any responsibilities to them. These are questions of philosophy, and then ultimately of politics.

Neither science nor religion is able to resolve this issue.

I myself would draw the line at viability outside of the womb. If the unborn is nonviable outside of it, then it has no rights. Then you should be able to abort it and use it for stem cell research.

And if it is viable, then it has rights. But that is just my own theory.

To decide a major issue like this would take some kind of popular referendum. And then once decided, the people should obey the will of the majority.

The ancient Greeks had no problem with infanticide. If a child was born infirm, they left it to die. But in modern times, this is not such a popular notion anymore. However the logic is turned on its head for unwanted pregnancy, especially late term (in the last 3 months), which is tolerated now. These two modern views are inconsistent.

Chaos results when minority interest groups do not obey the will of the majority in society.

 

[Thalassamania]

Just what science theories are kids brainwashed into believing are fact? Do you actually know what the word "theory" means in the science world?

 

[sandmanz32]

Just a point of clarification you do not have to swear on a bible in court. As an attorney and also having been a party to litigation at least here in and around Chicago most of the time a civil oath, no mention of swearing to God, is given. As I don't believe in swearing to God in a court of law, when I've been confronted with having to swear to God, I've refused and asked for a civil oath. Twice this has brought the proceedings to a total halt as the judges never encountered this before and didn't know what to to until I told them how to administer a civil oath.

My reason for doing this has to do with my belief in the separation of church and state. God doesn't belong in our governmental institutions because whose God are we talking about?

Besides if you swear to God to tell the truth if you lie then it should be up to God to punish you.

I was unaware of that. i knew you could get a different book, ie: the koran or something but i didnt know about a civil oath. I totally agree, god has no place in government.

 

[redacted]

The major social issue is whether the unborn have any rights, and whether the society therefore has any responsibilities to them. These are questions of philosophy, and then ultimately of politics.

Neither science nor religion is able to resolve this issue.

You mean those are philosophical activists, not religious activists, that are conducting those organized protests?

 

[nereas]

You mean those are philosophical activists, not religious activists, that are conducting those organized protests?

Yet another sign of brain death. <sigh!>

There is nothing in the Torah, Bible, or Q'ran scriptures about abortion, or abortion rights, or fetal rights. [Unlike homosexuality which is condemned up and down, no pun intended.]

Some church groups are activist, sure!

However they are expressing their philosophical views, and attempting to influence the voting majority with them.

It's just like slavery or alcohol. Neither is condemned in the Torah, Bible, or Q'ran. However religious groups have long opposed slavery and alcohol.

If you want to have an abortion, AWAP, I encourage you to do so. No matter what the stage of your fetus. In your case, we can make an exception out of necessity.

 

[nereas]

Just what science theories are kids brainwashed into believing are fact? Do you actually know what the word "theory" means in the science world?

You cannot think of any on your own, Thal?

 

[Thalassamania]

Scientific theories are:

1. Consistent (internally and externally)
2. Parsimonious (sparing in proposed entities or explanations)
3. Useful (describes and explains observed phenomena)
4. Empirically Testable & Falsifiable
5. Based upon Controlled, Repeated Experiments
6. Correctable & Dynamic (changes are made as new data is discovered)
7. Progressive (achieves all that previous theories have and more)
8. Tentative (admits that it might not be correct rather than asserting certainty)

I guess the only one I can think of that matches your description is the Theory of Relativity. But you might also mean: Big Bang Theory Cell theory; Kinetic theory of gases; Algorithmic information theory; Computation theory Decision theory; Circuit theory; Control theory; Signal theory; Systems theory; Rational choice theory; Plate tectonics theory; Catastrophe theory; Category theory; Chaos theory; Graph theory; Knot theory; Number theory; Probability theory; Set theory; Acoustic theory; Antenna theory; General relativity; Special relativity; Quantum field theory; Giant impact theory; Extreme value theory. Which do you prefer?

 

[nereas]

Scientific theories are:

1. Consistent (internally and externally)
2. Parsimonious (sparing in proposed entities or explanations)
3. Useful (describes and explains observed phenomena)
4. Empirically Testable & Falsifiable
5. Based upon Controlled, Repeated Experiments
6. Correctable & Dynamic (changes are made as new data is discovered)
7. Progressive (achieves all that previous theories have and more)
8. Tentative (admits that it might not be correct rather than asserting certainty)

I guess the only one I can think of that matches your description is the Theory of Relativity. But you might also mean: Big Bang Theory Cell theory; Kinetic theory of gases; Algorithmic information theory; Computation theory Decision theory; Circuit theory; Control theory; Signal theory; Systems theory; Rational choice theory; Plate tectonics theory; Catastrophe theory; Category theory; Chaos theory; Graph theory; Knot theory; Number theory; Probability theory; Set theory; Acoustic theory; Antenna theory; General relativity; Special relativity; Quantum field theory; Giant impact theory; Extreme value theory. Which do you prefer?

Monkeys into people is sort of the one that I find the least likely and the most offensive.

 

[Thalassamania]

Monkeys into people is sort of the one that I find the least likely and the most offensive.

Then, I am sorry to say, for all your vaulted learning and pretense, you appear to display the characteristics of naught but a taxocentristic, egotistical, fool. Too bad, it's a shame to see a potentially good mind go to waste.

 

[Sas]

Monkeys into people is sort of the one that I find the least likely and the most offensive.

I don't know of a theory that says that monkeys have turned into people? Could you please elaborate on this theory?