Not sure why, but while cleaning the kitchen and loading the dishwasher a started to think about something.

Now you have the hardcore sceptic who put there faith in science numbers and measurements, and you have the hardcore believer who puts there faith in personal experience and things that can not be explained or understood by science. I know many will say the obvious differences between the two, such as the sceptic believes in things that can be understood by mathematics, and the believer has to rely on faith without proof, but if you look at both ends of the scale they are identical in there thinking.

Now the sceptical scientist will say its my way or the highway, they are not open to any other theory other than the one they have been taught, now the hardcore believer such as say a fundamentalist Christian or Muslim will think and say exactly the same thing, that its there way or the highway, and are not open to any other theory other than the one they have been taught. Both believe they are 100% right, and are both living in there own reality, they might believe different things and have different theories, but there thought processes and agendas are identical.

This is why I like to embrace both science and spiritual thinking, because if your at any one side of the scale your really just the same as the so called opposite. To stand in the middle is surely the best approach is it not? Since neither side know it all, and if you look at achievements in the advancement of humanity it has come from both science and spirituality. Just think of what we might have achieved if they worked together more, instead of opposing each other?.

Spiritual ideas have given way in the past for many of the good things we seen in society and its also given way for many of the bad things we see in society, but then the same could be said about science, its given us some good things and some bad things.

Isn’t finding the balance the key, instead of shuffling together on one side or the other in groups? wouldn’t it be better to sieve though the bad things of both sides, throw them out, and then focus on the good things?

Think about this, the hardened scientist will go to school and learn things he is told by other scientifically minded people, who teach its the truth and the only way, and will not be interested in any other chain of though (spiritual thought) if it does not fit into what he has all ready been told, so his level of understanding will never surpass the person that taught him, and when it comes to him teaching others at a later date, them peoples level of understanding will never surpass his level, because there is no room for that leap of faith that looks into things that are unknown, or might on the surface seem gobbledygook or "new age claptrap".

The same can apply to the hardcore believer or religious person, they are taught from a young age and learn things by other religiously or spiritually minded people, and will not be interested in any other chain of though, because the people teaching them have told them its the only truth or way, so will not look at any other idea or theory, and will not accept anything that does not fit in with anything they have been told, so his level of understanding will never surpass the person that taught him and when it comes to him teaching others later about what he sees as truth, they will not surpass his level.

And it goes on and on, but lets look at the people who actually did find out new things and have been the most profound and successful scientists and thinkers of all times.

Isaac Newton, Nicholas Copernicus, Sir Fancis Bacon, Galileo Galilei Michael Faraday, Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein, DR Carl Jung, and many more all believed in some form of spiritual belief, or at least were open-minded about it, and some of them were openly religious. All of these people were open minded or believers in things science can not explain, yet it was because of that characteristic that they were willing to take that blind step in the dark, even though they would be ridiculed that caused them to be the brilliant minds that they were and are. Without that courage of looking a little further that can be seen that of which what they had all ready been taught, no matter how silly it might seem, they probably would not have ever achieved the things they did, so both believers and sceptics have a think about that the next time you wish to criticised the other.

Doesn’t that say it all?

Nice post!!!!

I was once a skeptic. I relied on knowledge provided by science courses in high school and in college, but then one day I experienced something that science alone could not explain.

Searched and still searching for answers. Nothing concrete mind you, but ever since that moment, I see the world in a different way.

Now, I have to say, I've never seen an alien, been abducted, or seen actual ghosts. Yet, I feel that we're not alone in the universe, and that there is an afterlife.

Many will say, oh you're just deluding yourself. Perhaps I am.

No, we'd just like to find out the empirical facts behind it. I don't think my skepticism makes me better or smarter, I just see things in a different light.

Besides, skepticism and belief are good for each other, it provides many different counter points.

(And Faeden, you can find quite a few believers that are more than willing to have the same kind of arrogance that you say skeptics have... that's more a matter of personality, not a common trait...)

(Oh, and I'm not talking 'bout you)

Yep, but note I was making comparisons between hard core believers and hardcore sceptics, as an example of how the two ends of the scale work, and how both sides really don’t do them selves any favours being that way, a closed mind is one not capable of learning anything other than what’s already in it.

Hi Goddess.

I am glad you found a middle ground, think your self lucky many cant.

Edit Double post.

What troubles me enormously is why those who don't embrace 'science' can't see that whilst it is defined in terms of 'measurement' and cold hard facts, it also contains beauty and the unexpected, unpredictable, which actually leaves the door open for beliefs over and above 'cold science'....All science reduces to 'probability' and whilst it is extremely useful to understand (I would say imperative) it is not absolute - there is room for an assortment of beliefs associated with science....

Ben

I agree it is useful to understand Ben, instead of blindly believe in stuff.

Ah... but there is beauty in science, and only a foolish man would believe science has all of the answers, at least right now...

I COMMEND this post of yours, Faedan! :applause: And quite sincerely, I COULDN'T agree MORE! The thing is, the ultimate goal for BOTH science AND spirituality is the SAME. The ultimate goal is TRUTH. Science and spirituality are just two different sides of the same coin (ie. the seeking of truth). I feel that it is of the UTMOST importance that people find a BALANCE of scientific knowledge and spiritual knowledge in their minds. Both broad fields of knowledge have something to offer to the other. If one integrates 'science' with spirituality, then you allow yourself to 'test' your spiritual beliefs (as opposed to blindly believing them). You can also 'experiment' with MANY different spiritual ideas and concepts to see which one is correct or the most valid. So, you see, science offers testing of one's beliefs and experimentation of one's beliefs to the field of spirituality. And spirituality, in turn, offers to the field of science intuitive conviction, knowing something to be TRUE despite not using one's sensory abilities of sight, smell, hearing, taste and touch as a means of verifying whether a certain proposition is true or not. Personally, I am fascinated by BOTH science AND spirituality... and why not? You can find BEAUTY and WONDER in BOTH these fields of knowledge! And, to me, they are NOT opposed to each other (as so many people seem to believe). Rather, they COMPLEMENT each other. For whilst science deals with this TANGIBLE, physical world of ours that can be perceived through our limited senses, spirituality places more emphasis on subtle planes that lie BEYOND the reach of our senses.

I see a contradiction here....if science can move into the realm of 'spirituality' then spirituality can be defined in scientific terms and moves from the realm of spirituality, becoming subservient to science...with me? It is no longer spirituality - it is science (I know one could argue that science in fact becomes spirituality but that won't work for heaps of reasons I won't go into here...take too long)....

I know you are essentially placing them side by side Rishi but science will nibble away at anything which can be 'conceptualised' - it doesn't always follow that it deals only in 'tangibles' - there is much out there which is no more than speculation and abstract (like quantum physics) but it is very much 'science'....

Ben

I dont see why folks have to be generalized, whether by themselves or others, to either extreme. Can a scientist believe in God? Yes. Can a believer in God hold to science? Yes.

But what if one day science proves that the afterlife exists, and that it is just the natural order of things, an aspect of the universe we don’t yet understand, with such things as quantum physics?. If you ask some Pagans what they think about the spiritual universe and the natural universe, being Pagan they obviously see the two things as one and the same, that’s the good thing about Paganism out of all the religions, its much more open to science, as science just does what they do anyway, studies and wants to understand nature more, the only difference is science doesn’t believe nature has a spiritual aspect to it, and is not as interested in having a spiritual relationship with it, just to use it for its own agenda to better its self.

One of the many mistakes people make about Paganism is they believe its primitive and simple minded, for instance many believe Pagans really believed and still do that the sun literally was a God or dragon crossing the sky into the underworld, when no Pagan believed these things literally, they where symbolic signs to better organise and understand the workings of nature, they where giving the things in nature symbolic meaning to better understand them, not much difference from when scientists put numerical symbols on there elements and connect them to other elements giving them a story of there own.

Yes but I was talking about the two extremes on either sides as examples, as both sides do exist.

As far as Pagans worshipping the sun as a 'God' is concerned, Hindus paid reverence to the 'deva' (which in Sanskrit literally means 'shining one' and NOT 'God/Goddess' -a COMMON misconception leading to the erroneous belief that Hindus are polytheists) known as 'Surya', which is basically the sun. They paid reverence to the sun not ONLY because they rightfully considered it a 'life-giver' but ALSO because they viewed it as a living entity ITSELF (with a 'soul' of its own). Modern science does not consider our sun to be a living being.

Rishi, did you know some people consider Hinduism a Pagan religion, along side with Buddhism? I see the similarities, but I don’t agree that they are, but yet some used the term Pagan to describe Hinduism and Buddhism as an insult, because they were not of the Abrahamic faiths.

Its an interesting subject when you look at the sun and Gods in all religions. If you look like you have stated in Hinduism it can be found in most religions, even Christianity. If you look at pictures of Jesus or Saints they always have a halo around there head that looks like the shining of the sun, I have seen Buddhists and Hindu pictures that do the same to there Gods. Also look at the connection between the Sun God in Paganism and the Son of God in Christianity, why do you think Christians worship most famously on a Sunday?

They worship the birth of there son of God when the Pagans worshiped the rebirth of there Sun God at Yule. If you look at some images of Jesus he has a long golden mane like a lion, representing the gold light that radiates from the Sun, Jesus has often been given the image of the lion. The lion in ancient Paganism was also symbolic of the Sun.

Yes, I am aware that some people consider Hinduism and Buddhism to be 'pagan' religions. The term 'pagan' is basically a derogatory word in this context, it basically means 'heathen' or 'infidel' (ie. someone who does not adhere to one of the three Abrahamic monotheist religions). As for the 'halo' around images of Jesus and other avatars, that is basically their auras being made VISIBLE to our physical eyesight. I agree that such an effulgence could be symbolic of our sun, but it's mainly shown above the heads and around the bodies of avatars to signify the spiritually enlightened and liberated state they are perpetually in. Did you know that it has been said that Gautama Buddha's aura was said to extend many miles from his body?

Personally I believe its the sun, even though many in them religions might not admit it, its proof of the Pagan connection in these religions.

Here have a look at these, I think its obvious its the sun.







Christians often associate God with the sun and its beams of light, although I expect they totally miss its Pagan connection.



Also look in many religious mythologies about Demons such as vampires and how they cant stand the light of the sun, AKA God.

Many believe that the earth is a living entity, look into James Lovelock and Gaia theory, so that could apply to the sun also.

Yes, there is indeed many Pagan influences and connections to be found in Christianity. You may believe it is the sun, but think about this... isn't our 'sun' but ONE external light source out of MANY? If you see in an illustration a 'light' emanating from the head and/or bodies of avatars such as Jesus, Buddha, Krishna etc. then I believe this 'light' to be their aura... ALL living things manifest an aura that surrounds their physical bodies. And yeah, many religious mythologies have creatures such as 'demons' that cannot tolerate bright, effulgent light. In many Hindu and Buddhist mythologies in particular, demonic beings suffer in the presence of the devas and other such exalted beings, because the auric light they emit is so bright and powerful. As for the Earth being a living entity, the Hindus believed (and still believe) this and hence refer to Earth as a 'mother'. Actually, they believe all celestial bodies are ALIVE. I don't think I've ever heard of the James Lovelock and Gaia theory before, thanks for informing me. I'll look into it.