=> Elizabeth
Your text is full of contradiction.
Really ? Do you know what paganism means ? It means having a religion that is not the mainstream. Nowadays, when we look back at history, we could say that Ancient Greeks were pagan, because nobody now believes in Greek polytheism. However, all the basis of science and philosophy have their root there. I guess you knew that biology and physics were "invented" by Aristotle in the 4th century BC. He also came up with the idea of causality and developed geometry, that he learnt with his master, Plato. All of Plato's students had to know geometry to be accepted in his "Academy". They, along with other philosophers are the fundaments of Western rationality and scientific thinking. A bit before them Democritus came up with the atomic theory, that is the theory that everything in the universe is made of tiny imperceptible particles (atoms), from which he bases his explanation of the creation of the world (without God).
Do you mean that Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam cannot be scientific because they possess some of the above conceptions ? But some are also present in Christianity. Christians :
- believe the heavens to be alive or divine.
Cause and effect is not more present in Christianity than in Buddhism or Hinduism. Islam and Christianity have the same conception for all of the above.
But the argument was about Protestanism being more "scientific" than Catholicism and you are trying to escape talking about other religions. Well, I understand that not everybody is a scientist or an historian (or both at the same time).
Your text is full of contradiction.
Elizabeth said:Science and paganism are obviously incompatible
Really ? Do you know what paganism means ? It means having a religion that is not the mainstream. Nowadays, when we look back at history, we could say that Ancient Greeks were pagan, because nobody now believes in Greek polytheism. However, all the basis of science and philosophy have their root there. I guess you knew that biology and physics were "invented" by Aristotle in the 4th century BC. He also came up with the idea of causality and developed geometry, that he learnt with his master, Plato. All of Plato's students had to know geometry to be accepted in his "Academy". They, along with other philosophers are the fundaments of Western rationality and scientific thinking. A bit before them Democritus came up with the atomic theory, that is the theory that everything in the universe is made of tiny imperceptible particles (atoms), from which he bases his explanation of the creation of the world (without God).
but it is also a priori incompatible with religious or belief systems that don't conceive of time as linear or think in terms of cause-effect relationships in nature. That have an organismic view of nature which says that everything is alive. That believe the heavens to be alive or divine. That don't see man as fundamentally and qualitatively different from other species on and on. There has to be a balance between faith and reason or all explanations inevitably turn to an all-powerful, absolutist conception of God or the divine (perhaps one reason the scientific method wasn't conceived in Islamic countries before Europe). Which to my understanding some or all of these notions can be found in aspect of Hinduism, Buddhism and even Islam.
Do you mean that Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam cannot be scientific because they possess some of the above conceptions ? But some are also present in Christianity. Christians :
- believe the heavens to be alive or divine.
Cause and effect is not more present in Christianity than in Buddhism or Hinduism. Islam and Christianity have the same conception for all of the above.
But the argument was about Protestanism being more "scientific" than Catholicism and you are trying to escape talking about other religions. Well, I understand that not everybody is a scientist or an historian (or both at the same time).