People say that God did it because saying they didn't know was more embarrassing in those times. Especially for Isaac Newton with the Catholic church all over him.
I don't know how much I believe the statement that people who believe in God limit their ability to continue science. Newton wasn't "basking in the majesty of God". That's a little unfair to Newton, simply because I think that we all have our limits. If one disbelieves in God, one does not simply gain the ability to continue for science. Laplace could just not believe in God. There are many possibilities. To say that religion limits science is sort of unfair, particularly to Newton.
Fair enough but if one has no added hurdels to jump or boundries too big to cross it can easily be argued that the journey to truth and understanding will be an easier path.
@nofec The belief in religion/god does limit the ability to continue science. Limitless is first and that's how science came to be if there is a limit there wouldn't be science. Limit is an excuse. If one DOESN'T believe in "God", one DOES gain the thirst for knowledge.
"Our brain is like a cell limited by our own belief(s). Its time to move beyond!"
"If you think a thing is impossible, you'll make it impossible."
@PimpingRice But I feel like you can believe in God and still think "impossibly". Everyone has a thirst for knowledge. It is within us. I mean, to a point, one needs to believe in something whether that be science or God or whatever. Science to some extent is a religion as well because one needs to have faith in order to continue science. I believe our limitation is being human, not a belief in God or even science. It is being human and that's what probably happened to Newton. Not faith in God.
@nofec Ok first of all science is NOT a belief system nor a religion, it is a response to a claim therefore it does not require faith in order to continue, that is just ridiculous! The word "faith" does not belong in the world of science. Religion requires faith/claim which is the flaw and that flaw is the "limit" to what religion has to explain about things. Science on the other hand requires an idea that can be proven right or wrong and can still be carried out. Newton has run out of ideas.
@PimpingRice lol, really? Science absolutely requires faith. You have to have faith in the right or the wrong in order to find the answer in the first place. Notice how there are few "laws" in science and many "theories". A theory is a belief that can guide behavior. You need faith to believe. Of course Newton has run out of ideas. He's dead, just like this argument. And dude, change your name, your hurting your legitimacy.
@nofec Lol you still don't get it. From the looks of things you really don't know what the word "faith" and "theory" means so from here on out this argument is no longer valid since you don't have the exact knowledge of what I'm implying AND what your are implying in your statement. You sir is ignorant.
Thats bullshit and you know it. Does it require faith to now ow your coputer works so you can spew your fucktard nonsense ont he Internet? Does it take faith for your car to start when you turn the key in the ignition slot?
@NUTCASE71733 It's not bullshit though. The internet doesn't always work. Your car doesn't always start. Sure, one can assume that it will start every time, but there is still some faith that it will happen. That is why there is room for error. Sure, I could be wrong, but I feel that there are many definitions of faith, including ones that happen in the realm of even science. It's just my opinion. You don't need to hate over it, jeez.
@nofec "It's not bullshit though. The internet doesn't always work. Your car doesn't always start. Sure, one can assume that it will start every time, but there is still some faith that it will happen." that's not faith... that's hope... I HOPE my car will start. I Hope my internet will work, Having faith is firm belief in something for which there is no proof.
Brilliant point by Tyson. I'm a fairly active atheist, and I thought I'd heard all the arguments for and against. But this was new to me, and quite compelling as an exploration of "why" such silliness as ID ever makes it into the mind of an otherwise rigorous scientist.
I've always liked Tyson, but he's just entered my Top Ten!
As we grew numerous and spread North, we grew and stored crops and domesticated animals because North Africa and West Asia didn't have as much to gather as subsaharan forests. A few idiots got lost in the desert, suffered brain damage from heat and dehydrration and started babbling religion and we lost 1000 years in the dark ages. Without God, we would be colonizing other galaxies by now. Instead, we just sit on this rock, waiting for an asteroid to come along so we can all go extinct.
@Bill1275w de Grasse makes a self defeating philosophical point about free will though and it destroys your point as well. If there is no free will, Newton's genius, or his religiousity or the current state of religion are truly malleable. It means that our efforts, thoughts and even beliefs or lack thereof derive not from influence and any "delusion" or wishful thinking is neither ours to decide or change any more than my choice to type this or your inevitable retort.
@Wyldwulf "points" are irrelevant. Only survival is relevant. Every penny spent stockpiling weapons and not educating and taking care of children is another nail in the coffin of our species. The space rock is coming. 14k people already die daily from lack of food. The environmental devastation wrought by 19th century internal combustion energy technology we refuse to replace is just beginnig to destroy us. We have to be smart enough to handle them all, or it's the end of the line.
Our purpose is to survive and propagate our species just like it has been for every organism for billions of years. Our intelligence is merely an adaptation to leaving the trees behing in Africa's rift valley as the fruit rich trees began to spread too far apart. We had to stand up to see the leopards hiding in the grass as we walked between the trees. We had to develop weapons to kill animals which were faster and/or more powerful than us.
Actually no, there is no Atheistic construct or entity called love. They feel an evolutionary and biological instinct to protect their children from the hopeless and inevitable death and delaying the transition to the wormfood they will become. Joyous, no?
I want science to stand and acknowledge that religion is the the yin to its yang. How many discoveries were made by science, both positive and detrimental in direct effort to prove a religious tenant incorrect. You can not more eradicate religion than you can the gun. One may be material and another an idea, but it we can no more undo our cultural history than undo the making of the atom bomb.
I some what agree with you but the need for human inovation & wonder is not driven to undermine religion; Actually religion claimed to have the answers before the 99.915% of the masses But stopped its mental growth since "we have all the answers". Christianity and a hand full of other cults do have an important value because it is our history. But they all fail Big-Time as the reason we need to further the potential of our future.
@M1ST3RHYDE I challenge ANYONE to give a purely atheistic REASON for us to further our kind, to care about the Earth, universe, if it cares not for us. Science might eventually tell us how to do these things, but the "reason" is why religion will never disappear. It is the innate knowledge in man that his reason is unknowable that will keep religion in the human psyche.
Truth be told I have only read the first line of your response & I'll get to the rest after this but Atheists ONLY means Without a belief in a god. For sake of argument lets say you Do Not collect stamps & I want you to tell me why you being an Astampcollector can explain why people wage war or stop progress.
@Wyldwulf A religious Christian deep down inside don't give a crap if bad stuff happens in the world because they will always say "It is God's will" and Atheist would say, "We need to fix this or we'll all gonna go extinct."
Human survival will depend more on being real when bad things happen, not being a delusional person who when sees an asteroid coming to destroy the earth would not mount a space colony cause he or she has faith that god will stop it before it hits the earth.
I think the point I am trying to make is that an Atheist may care, but why? I fail to see where a self aware being can find any reason for the propagation of our species. If you truly believe that there is no god, no hope of one, and no hope of meaning, that human kind is already on a crash course to inevitable and meaningless destruction, t would say if you then have children, you are not bright, you are a fucking asshole. Because it is harder to exist than not to.
@Wyldwulf lol, man kind has always had its ups and downs, of course most of the downs are caused by religious conflict. I am perhaps one of those people who tries really hard to spread reason so people out there may come self aware, and know its important to survive, and pass on your wisdom to the next generation, to give them a chance to live as we did, and so did our ancestors. Call me whatever you want, but just cause you have an imaginary friend it doesn't make you special, just delusional.
@Wyldwulf "I challenge ANYONE to give a purely atheistic REASON for us to further our kind"
We are controlled inherently by the programming of our genes. And the number one directive from our genes is to survive. Self-preservation is built in, simple as that. The reason we're here? The reason to further our kind? None whatsoever. We are a happenstance of cosmic events. Some (most) people can't accept that, so they invent a reason. They invent god.
@Wyldwulf How about "for the lulz". It seems to work for the gods. Any challenge you can put to atheists, is just as relevant for the gods. What is the reason for the gods continued existence? What is their purpose, and what defines it? etc
If you doubt atheists care about the earth, just remember that they love their children too.
@Wyldwulf Life evolved on this planet for billions of years without a reason. Just because we developed a cerebrum and now ask for a reason doesn't mean its relevant. We're here to fuck period. If you eat, drink, sleep, stay warm, avoid predators, and after all that are healthy, attractive, and clever enough, you get to fuck. Then your genes get passed on to your offspring. Female tetrapods ensure the young survive. Been the same for hundreds of millions of years.
@Wyldwulf Ok, here's the reason: Survival of our species, pure and simple. Atheistic enough for you? Don't try to anthropomorphize the universe, it's not necessary for it to care for us. A baby horse or giraffe has to get up and stand on its own immediately after birth. That is us after being born of the universe.
@thoof2001 That's a reason, but it doesn't mean I should care about it. Why should I care about the survival of our kind, or the universe for that matter? It takes a leap of "faith" to assume that it is harder to exist than not to, but with that assumption, and free will why would one desire to propagate? If to have someone take care of you later in life, it makes you a dick. I see the pain most endure in life as a curse, but if science seeks to end that pain, it is still a futile effort.
He is very deserving of all his public scientific placements for exactly the reason that you give him credit for.. At CalTech he & other speakers give open lectures for the public; They are VERY hard to get into and even I have only been able to get seating to 5 of them but since you like this look into it, They are all well worth the wait in line.
On the chance that you have not seen the info about Arabic Science and it's groth being retarded by religion than I hav it in one of my playlists & I think its Titled something like Muslim science 900ad.
Gotta say I really like the way Dr. Tyson presented ID thinking: he slammed it and spoke well of it in the same voice. We humans tend to see it--it is a psychological reality for many of us--but scientifically it is more than useless, it is all too often an obstacle to understanding and learning.
I.D. is A Failure of an answer. Its Sayn That When Ever The Truth about Matters that can be answered by Science The Quick & Dirty Answer of GOD DID IT tends to Creap in the Equation. If you already stray from the pack which invests in the Theoloical then Im sure you know that When Some1 doesn't have An Answer or cant understand something Then The SuperNatural Explanation is used.
10 points for bringing it up & You raise A VERY Good point . Galileo couldn't really make it out, He first thought it was 2 large moons or Maybe Rings but in late 1654 orearly 1655 Huygens was able to designat Without Doubt that they are rings.
If you Google Galileo's first sketch of Saturn 1610 it should be the first Image. I was hoping to put A good Link from NASA but I couldn't, Sorry about that.
People say that God did it because saying they didn't know was more embarrassing in those times. Especially for Isaac Newton with the Catholic church all over him.
BeAsTm0aD 7 months ago
I don't know how much I believe the statement that people who believe in God limit their ability to continue science. Newton wasn't "basking in the majesty of God". That's a little unfair to Newton, simply because I think that we all have our limits. If one disbelieves in God, one does not simply gain the ability to continue for science. Laplace could just not believe in God. There are many possibilities. To say that religion limits science is sort of unfair, particularly to Newton.
nofec 10 months ago
@nofec
Fair enough but if one has no added hurdels to jump or boundries too big to cross it can easily be argued that the journey to truth and understanding will be an easier path.
M1ST3RHYDE 10 months ago 3
@nofec The belief in religion/god does limit the ability to continue science. Limitless is first and that's how science came to be if there is a limit there wouldn't be science. Limit is an excuse. If one DOESN'T believe in "God", one DOES gain the thirst for knowledge.
"Our brain is like a cell limited by our own belief(s). Its time to move beyond!"
"If you think a thing is impossible, you'll make it impossible."
PimpingRice 9 months ago
@PimpingRice But I feel like you can believe in God and still think "impossibly". Everyone has a thirst for knowledge. It is within us. I mean, to a point, one needs to believe in something whether that be science or God or whatever. Science to some extent is a religion as well because one needs to have faith in order to continue science. I believe our limitation is being human, not a belief in God or even science. It is being human and that's what probably happened to Newton. Not faith in God.
nofec 9 months ago
@nofec Ok first of all science is NOT a belief system nor a religion, it is a response to a claim therefore it does not require faith in order to continue, that is just ridiculous! The word "faith" does not belong in the world of science. Religion requires faith/claim which is the flaw and that flaw is the "limit" to what religion has to explain about things. Science on the other hand requires an idea that can be proven right or wrong and can still be carried out. Newton has run out of ideas.
PimpingRice 9 months ago
@PimpingRice lol, really? Science absolutely requires faith. You have to have faith in the right or the wrong in order to find the answer in the first place. Notice how there are few "laws" in science and many "theories". A theory is a belief that can guide behavior. You need faith to believe. Of course Newton has run out of ideas. He's dead, just like this argument. And dude, change your name, your hurting your legitimacy.
nofec 9 months ago
@nofec Lol you still don't get it. From the looks of things you really don't know what the word "faith" and "theory" means so from here on out this argument is no longer valid since you don't have the exact knowledge of what I'm implying AND what your are implying in your statement. You sir is ignorant.
PimpingRice 9 months ago
@PimpingRice lol, alrighty ;)
nofec 9 months ago
@nofec
Thats bullshit and you know it. Does it require faith to now ow your coputer works so you can spew your fucktard nonsense ont he Internet? Does it take faith for your car to start when you turn the key in the ignition slot?
NUTCASE71733 8 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 It's not bullshit though. The internet doesn't always work. Your car doesn't always start. Sure, one can assume that it will start every time, but there is still some faith that it will happen. That is why there is room for error. Sure, I could be wrong, but I feel that there are many definitions of faith, including ones that happen in the realm of even science. It's just my opinion. You don't need to hate over it, jeez.
nofec 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nofec "It's not bullshit though. The internet doesn't always work. Your car doesn't always start. Sure, one can assume that it will start every time, but there is still some faith that it will happen." that's not faith... that's hope... I HOPE my car will start. I Hope my internet will work, Having faith is firm belief in something for which there is no proof.
jdogg781517 1 month ago
Comment removed
nofec 8 months ago
@nofec But later as the world progress, I forgot who, a person has solved the answer to which Newton was stuck on
PimpingRice 9 months ago
Brilliant point by Tyson. I'm a fairly active atheist, and I thought I'd heard all the arguments for and against. But this was new to me, and quite compelling as an exploration of "why" such silliness as ID ever makes it into the mind of an otherwise rigorous scientist.
I've always liked Tyson, but he's just entered my Top Ten!
sincristo 1 year ago
As we grew numerous and spread North, we grew and stored crops and domesticated animals because North Africa and West Asia didn't have as much to gather as subsaharan forests. A few idiots got lost in the desert, suffered brain damage from heat and dehydrration and started babbling religion and we lost 1000 years in the dark ages. Without God, we would be colonizing other galaxies by now. Instead, we just sit on this rock, waiting for an asteroid to come along so we can all go extinct.
Bill1275w 1 year ago 19
@Bill1275w
NICE! :~D
M1ST3RHYDE 1 year ago
@Bill1275w de Grasse makes a self defeating philosophical point about free will though and it destroys your point as well. If there is no free will, Newton's genius, or his religiousity or the current state of religion are truly malleable. It means that our efforts, thoughts and even beliefs or lack thereof derive not from influence and any "delusion" or wishful thinking is neither ours to decide or change any more than my choice to type this or your inevitable retort.
Wyldwulf 10 months ago
@Wyldwulf "points" are irrelevant. Only survival is relevant. Every penny spent stockpiling weapons and not educating and taking care of children is another nail in the coffin of our species. The space rock is coming. 14k people already die daily from lack of food. The environmental devastation wrought by 19th century internal combustion energy technology we refuse to replace is just beginnig to destroy us. We have to be smart enough to handle them all, or it's the end of the line.
Bill1275w 8 months ago
@Bill1275w I saved this comment in my hard drive.
oldpiq 10 months ago
Our purpose is to survive and propagate our species just like it has been for every organism for billions of years. Our intelligence is merely an adaptation to leaving the trees behing in Africa's rift valley as the fruit rich trees began to spread too far apart. We had to stand up to see the leopards hiding in the grass as we walked between the trees. We had to develop weapons to kill animals which were faster and/or more powerful than us.
Bill1275w 1 year ago
Actually no, there is no Atheistic construct or entity called love. They feel an evolutionary and biological instinct to protect their children from the hopeless and inevitable death and delaying the transition to the wormfood they will become. Joyous, no?
Wyldwulf 1 year ago
I want science to stand and acknowledge that religion is the the yin to its yang. How many discoveries were made by science, both positive and detrimental in direct effort to prove a religious tenant incorrect. You can not more eradicate religion than you can the gun. One may be material and another an idea, but it we can no more undo our cultural history than undo the making of the atom bomb.
Wyldwulf 1 year ago
@Wyldwulf
I some what agree with you but the need for human inovation & wonder is not driven to undermine religion; Actually religion claimed to have the answers before the 99.915% of the masses But stopped its mental growth since "we have all the answers". Christianity and a hand full of other cults do have an important value because it is our history. But they all fail Big-Time as the reason we need to further the potential of our future.
M1ST3RHYDE 1 year ago
@M1ST3RHYDE I challenge ANYONE to give a purely atheistic REASON for us to further our kind, to care about the Earth, universe, if it cares not for us. Science might eventually tell us how to do these things, but the "reason" is why religion will never disappear. It is the innate knowledge in man that his reason is unknowable that will keep religion in the human psyche.
Wyldwulf 1 year ago
@Wyldwulf
Truth be told I have only read the first line of your response & I'll get to the rest after this but Atheists ONLY means Without a belief in a god. For sake of argument lets say you Do Not collect stamps & I want you to tell me why you being an Astampcollector can explain why people wage war or stop progress.
M1ST3RHYDE 1 year ago 3
@M1ST3RHYDE lol PWND HIM!:)
buktomsin 1 year ago
@Wyldwulf A religious Christian deep down inside don't give a crap if bad stuff happens in the world because they will always say "It is God's will" and Atheist would say, "We need to fix this or we'll all gonna go extinct."
Human survival will depend more on being real when bad things happen, not being a delusional person who when sees an asteroid coming to destroy the earth would not mount a space colony cause he or she has faith that god will stop it before it hits the earth.
ateopuertorico 1 year ago
@ateopuertorico
I think the point I am trying to make is that an Atheist may care, but why? I fail to see where a self aware being can find any reason for the propagation of our species. If you truly believe that there is no god, no hope of one, and no hope of meaning, that human kind is already on a crash course to inevitable and meaningless destruction, t would say if you then have children, you are not bright, you are a fucking asshole. Because it is harder to exist than not to.
Wyldwulf 1 year ago
@Wyldwulf lol, man kind has always had its ups and downs, of course most of the downs are caused by religious conflict. I am perhaps one of those people who tries really hard to spread reason so people out there may come self aware, and know its important to survive, and pass on your wisdom to the next generation, to give them a chance to live as we did, and so did our ancestors. Call me whatever you want, but just cause you have an imaginary friend it doesn't make you special, just delusional.
ateopuertorico 1 year ago
@Wyldwulf "I challenge ANYONE to give a purely atheistic REASON for us to further our kind"
We are controlled inherently by the programming of our genes. And the number one directive from our genes is to survive. Self-preservation is built in, simple as that. The reason we're here? The reason to further our kind? None whatsoever. We are a happenstance of cosmic events. Some (most) people can't accept that, so they invent a reason. They invent god.
eurisko67 1 year ago
@Wyldwulf How about "for the lulz". It seems to work for the gods. Any challenge you can put to atheists, is just as relevant for the gods. What is the reason for the gods continued existence? What is their purpose, and what defines it? etc
If you doubt atheists care about the earth, just remember that they love their children too.
BentStigsen 1 year ago
@Wyldwulf Life evolved on this planet for billions of years without a reason. Just because we developed a cerebrum and now ask for a reason doesn't mean its relevant. We're here to fuck period. If you eat, drink, sleep, stay warm, avoid predators, and after all that are healthy, attractive, and clever enough, you get to fuck. Then your genes get passed on to your offspring. Female tetrapods ensure the young survive. Been the same for hundreds of millions of years.
Bill1275w 1 year ago
@Wyldwulf Ok, here's the reason: Survival of our species, pure and simple. Atheistic enough for you? Don't try to anthropomorphize the universe, it's not necessary for it to care for us. A baby horse or giraffe has to get up and stand on its own immediately after birth. That is us after being born of the universe.
thoof2001 10 months ago
@thoof2001 That's a reason, but it doesn't mean I should care about it. Why should I care about the survival of our kind, or the universe for that matter? It takes a leap of "faith" to assume that it is harder to exist than not to, but with that assumption, and free will why would one desire to propagate? If to have someone take care of you later in life, it makes you a dick. I see the pain most endure in life as a curse, but if science seeks to end that pain, it is still a futile effort.
Wyldwulf 10 months ago
@ 6:30...I had no need for that hypothesis.....lol....very appropriate, very clever!
100PercentGreen 1 year ago
@100PercentGreen
He is very deserving of all his public scientific placements for exactly the reason that you give him credit for.. At CalTech he & other speakers give open lectures for the public; They are VERY hard to get into and even I have only been able to get seating to 5 of them but since you like this look into it, They are all well worth the wait in line.
M1ST3RHYDE 1 year ago
@100PercentGreen
On the chance that you have not seen the info about Arabic Science and it's groth being retarded by religion than I hav it in one of my playlists & I think its Titled something like Muslim science 900ad.
M1ST3RHYDE 1 year ago
ID is the philosophy of ignorance. Nice.
karadan100 1 year ago 13
Gotta say I really like the way Dr. Tyson presented ID thinking: he slammed it and spoke well of it in the same voice. We humans tend to see it--it is a psychological reality for many of us--but scientifically it is more than useless, it is all too often an obstacle to understanding and learning.
Inferno41 2 years ago
so it this an arguement against intelligent design or for?
Dougca1985 2 years ago
I.D. is A Failure of an answer. Its Sayn That When Ever The Truth about Matters that can be answered by Science The Quick & Dirty Answer of GOD DID IT tends to Creap in the Equation. If you already stray from the pack which invests in the Theoloical then Im sure you know that When Some1 doesn't have An Answer or cant understand something Then The SuperNatural Explanation is used.
M1ST3RHYDE 2 years ago
i agree :) thanks for clarifying
Dougca1985 2 years ago
Wasn't Galileo the first to see the rings he invented the telescope.
flyingscience 2 years ago
@ Flyingscience
10 points for bringing it up & You raise A VERY Good point . Galileo couldn't really make it out, He first thought it was 2 large moons or Maybe Rings but in late 1654 orearly 1655 Huygens was able to designat Without Doubt that they are rings.
If you Google Galileo's first sketch of Saturn 1610 it should be the first Image. I was hoping to put A good Link from NASA but I couldn't, Sorry about that.
M1ST3RHYDE 2 years ago
Galilieo discovered the four largest moons of Jupiter.
mattrmsf 1 year ago
Well done Mr Tyson.
wowamonn 2 years ago
Brilliant, as usual.
Inferno41 2 years ago 6
yay!
Zentz29 2 years ago 2