The whole history of thought is absorbed into science and is used for improving every single theory
I think this means that we never completely settle on an explanation. Scientists continue to use history and events to try to piece together new hypothesis to try to formulate the best explanation for what is happening.
It is unquestionable that religious belief may affect their motives for right doing in various and potent ways, but to say that apart from such beliefs we should have no ground for discriminating good from evil, right from wrong, is irresponsible
So true. People can have their own beliefs and daily practices for their religion but there does have to be a limit. If their practices are harming themselves or others and they justify it by saying it is part of their religion I do not think that is morally okay.
Agreeing that knowledge is a great good, I think that hope and peace and happiness are great goods also, and Ican conceive a situation in which it would be better for mankind to remain in permanent error on some matter of belief if this were the price of happiness than to know the truth and be unhappy.
This is very insightful and something I think people need to talk more about. Knowledge is powerful but at the end of the day I do not believe it is the most important thing. Happiness and well-being are far more important and we should not let the unknown allow us to spiral and constantly look for answers.
. To think is to try to get at the truth, and the person who professes to bedoing that will be a dupe if he consciously allows any thought of his own or other people's advantage to affect his conclusions.
This statement is very true. If someone lets their biased opinions effect their conclusions and beliefs then they are not credible. I do however feel it is okay to have beliefs and bias so long as you take that into consideration and tell others your thoughts.
The rule that life should be saved must at times be broken in the interest of the overriding good of a nation.
This is interesting to me because lots of people argue this. I understand the concept of doing something "immoral" for the good of others but lots of people argue that death is never ok. This makes me think of the debate of the death penalty and whether we should be allowed to take someone's life because of their actions. There are two sides and it goes to show how people view what is moral and immoral differently.
That nightin his ro om Mik e prayedas he nev er hadbefore.Godseemedclosean d intimate, like a bro theror lovedone
As I read this passage I assumed that Mike was not a follower of the Church because he questioned so many of the Churches teachings. This shows that people can expand their thoughts and be interested in science and new findings, but also be religious. There can be a balance of the two and there is nothing wrong with that.
Thereis still another hypothesis th at is a riv alto the miraclehypothesis.Allegedmiracles may no t bedue to sometrickor fraud,but to misperce ptio ns basedon re ligiousbias.A personfull of religious zeal may seewhat he or she wantsto see, not whatis real ly th
I do agree with this point and agree with the previous annotations that it is important to keep an open mind however I would also like to add that if someone who is religious says something is a miracle and is God's doing I don't think there is a problem with that and that they need to expand their horizons. Religion is a very important part in some people's lives and they should freely believe in what they want to.
“Firstof all , if yo u recall,I arguethat evenif mira -cl es haveoccu rred,when‘miracle’is definedas anev en t causedby somenoncorporealcrea ture, theirexis -ten ce givesno sup port to beliefin God.A no ncorpo-realcreature neednotbe God.Thereare riv alsu pernaturalhypo thes es th at accountfor miraclesaswell as the Godhypothesis.”
This line seems strange and quite honestly confuses me. I wonder what other 'creature' he is referring to if he even has another explanation in mind. I understand what he means that a miracle could be something else other than God but I don't understand what else he thinks could be a cause.
ndeed,somefeel thatthedoctrineof miraclesshouldbe deemphasizedand intime perhapsbe eliminatedall together
This is an interesting point. Perhaps the Church would not loose as many followers if they did not emphasize miracles as much since new technology is explaining some phenomenons, but on the other hand, worshipers are supposed to believe in God no matter what and follow the bible blindly so it is a tricky situation. In my opinion I would not deemphasize miracles because they are a part of the Church and if people start to not believe then so be it.
As peoplebecomemoreeducatedtheyfind it harderand harderto believe in miraclesin the way th at theChurchexpectsthemto
This does make sense and I do believe as time goes on less people will believe the Church. As more and more things can be explained by science, the less things there are to be explained by religion. The Church is not solely based on miracles, but they are a large part of it.
Th e Churchhas vigorously re -ject ed the viewso pop ular sinceth e nine teenthcen tu ryth at miracles are impossibl e
I wonder if some people use their religion in this aspect too for peace of mind. They perhaps use the term 'miracles' to explain things they do not understand.
“Whycou ldn’ t theyjust admitth at theywerelyingfor a goodcause?”he askedhimself.But he knewth eanswer.“Theysimplycan’tface
This line really speaks to me and is something I have thought about before. Religion is a part of many peoples' lives for a number of reasons and one of those reasons is to bring them peace of mind. It makes people feel better knowing their is a God looking out for them and who will guide them through life and most importantly who will bring them to heaven once they die. Some people 'simply can't face it' because they need to believe their soul will continue to be alive in heaven so they will turn a blind eye to new findings and believe the word of God.
Unfortunately,he knewthatthe Churchsometimeshad to bend the truthfor its own nob leends.He did not mindth at. Mikewas enou gh of a uti l-itari an to knowtha t truthwas not everything and th atsometimesit had to be sac r
His anxiousness to present his findings is understandable as he is aware of what backlash he may receive. He is acknowledging the fact that the Church has bent the truth to support their beliefs so him contradicting those beliefs with what he believes to be the truth may cause retaliation.