Antlerman Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 The purpose of this thread is to discuss topic possibilities for a potential Arena debate between Rayskidude and myself. We won't get into any debate of the topics within this thread, but merely discussing the format and an agreed upon subject for debate. I am going to ask Han Solo to act as moderator for the debate if he has the time for it, and to participate in this discussion with suggestions as moderator. This thread is mainly a discussion between the three of us, and I'll ask that no debating take place here. Ray had suggested a topic of discussion between us be "Scientific evidence; does the data point to Evolution or Creation?" In considering this suggestion I feel it would be better to expand this to something I see as far more to the point and pertinent to both the secular and religious communities: "The Relationship between Science and Religion". Debating the science as non-scientists has been done to the point of exhaustion with neither side satisfied with the other. I personally will defer to the expertise of those with the credentials in science. Others may prefer to defer to those who speak from a position of divine authority. And it is specifically to that point I wish for us to address our debate. The relationship between science and religion. Why does someone rebuff advances in science when they have no scientific data to begin with outside of an understanding of a particular reading of a sacred text? How should we approach science? Should it be subject to divine authority of the church? Contrariwise, how should we approach religion? Should it be subject to the authority of science? And how should we deal with the existence of one another? Should science go away? Should religion go away? I am considering in the debate for me to state a positive position regarding a particular view in regards to that topic, and Ray would attempt to challenge that. Likewise Ray will state a positive position about his views on this and I will attempt to refute. We of course can address the debate of Religious Creationism versus the scientific Theory of Evolution, but I don't have any desire to go down the path of what has already been fleshed out by actual scientists to the satisfaction of the scientific community and the legal system of our government. I am interested in addressing a relationship between science and religion that will not go away, despite the fantasies of those on either side of the debate. Your thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 I am going to ask Han Solo to act as moderator for the debate if he has the time for it, and to participate in this discussion with suggestions as moderator. I think it's doable. I'm having the last final tomorrow, and even though I'm starting the summer semester in a week, it's just one class until mid-July. And it seems like you're suggesting I'm taking the neutral-moderator role, and will pose challenging questions and restating/summarizing viewpoints as necessary, but without really taking side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted May 20, 2009 Author Share Posted May 20, 2009 And it seems like you're suggesting I'm taking the neutral-moderator role, and will pose challenging questions and restating/summarizing viewpoints as necessary, but without really taking side? Yes. That's the idea. We can establish parameters for both of us to stay within and you can call us back if we stray to far afield. Suggest direction within the parameters, etc. I'm hoping at this point to work out the specific guidelines, and our positions we wish to argue for and defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayskidude Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 The purpose of this thread is to discuss topic possibilities for a potential Arena debate between Rayskidude and myself. We won't get into any debate of the topics within this thread, but merely discussing the format and an agreed upon subject for debate. I am going to ask Han Solo to act as moderator for the debate if he has the time for it, and to participate in this discussion with suggestions as moderator. This thread is mainly a discussion between the three of us, and I'll ask that no debating take place here. Ray had suggested a topic of discussion between us be "Scientific evidence; does the data point to Evolution or Creation?" In considering this suggestion I feel it would be better to expand this to something I see as far more to the point and pertinent to both the secular and religious communities: "The Relationship between Science and Religion". Debating the science as non-scientists has been done to the point of exhaustion with neither side satisfied with the other. I personally will defer to the expertise of those with the credentials in science. Others may prefer to defer to those who speak from a position of divine authority. And it is specifically to that point I wish for us to address our debate. The relationship between science and religion. Why does someone rebuff advances in science when they have no scientific data to begin with outside of an understanding of a particular reading of a sacred text? How should we approach science? Should it be subject to divine authority of the church? Contrariwise, how should we approach religion? Should it be subject to the authority of science? And how should we deal with the existence of one another? Should science go away? Should religion go away? I am considering in the debate for me to state a positive position regarding a particular view in regards to that topic, and Ray would attempt to challenge that. Likewise Ray will state a positive position about his views on this and I will attempt to refute. We of course can address the debate of Religious Creationism versus the scientific Theory of Evolution, but I don't have any desire to go down the path of what has already been fleshed out by actual scientists to the satisfaction of the scientific community and the legal system of our government. I am interested in addressing a relationship between science and religion that will not go away, despite the fantasies of those on either side of the debate. Your thoughts? Sounz good to me; but I would note that in discussing this topic, it may be occasionally pertinent to bring up specific scientific data as a real-world example of a point that is being posited. Other than that I'd be happy to delve into the relationship between religion and science - though my perspective of religion would be grounded in Biblical, Protestant Christianity since that's my background for the past 35 years. I wouldn't be qualified to discuss Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto, etc attitudes toward science. So I say - let's move ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 21, 2009 Share Posted May 21, 2009 So what kind of parameters do you guys want? A limit on the post size? A limit on the time between responses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted May 22, 2009 Author Share Posted May 22, 2009 Sounz good to me; but I would note that in discussing this topic, it may be occasionally pertinent to bring up specific scientific data as a real-world example of a point that is being posited. Other than that I'd be happy to delve into the relationship between religion and science - though my perspective of religion would be grounded in Biblical, Protestant Christianity since that's my background for the past 35 years. I wouldn't be qualified to discuss Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto, etc attitudes toward science. So I say - let's move ahead. Let's take a few moments to more tightly define the discussion topic in order for us to better focus on what our positions are; what we are proposing. I would like to see a positive position which we each argue for and defend. In talking about the relationship of science and religion, it's a huge consideration. If you could look at this simple Wiki link here which gives a few basic categories from which to choose a position to argue for: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_...ion_and_science The kinds of interactions that might arise between science and religion have been classified using the following typology:[2] 1. Conflict when either discipline threatens to take over the legitimate concerns of the other * For example, John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White's conflict thesis 2. Independence treating each as quite separate realms of enquiry. * For example, Stephen Jay Gould's Non-Overlapping Magisteria (NOMA) 3. Dialogue suggesting that each field has things to say to each other about phenomena in which their interests overlap. * For example, William G. Pollard's studies in Physicist and Christian: A dialogue between the communities 4. Integration aiming to unify both fields into a single discourse. * For example, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's Omega point and Ian Barbour's sympathy towards process philosophy/process theology[3] To me to debate the basis for why each of us are arguing for either claiming Behe as a champion of a position of Intelligent Design of life and the cosmos, or in deferring to the majority of consensus of the world's scientists supporting an Evolutionary model of explanation for the natural world, is more relevant than arguing the specifics of the science which neither of us are truly qualified to debate. I certainly have an amount of understanding and opinions as do you. But what is it about the importance of those opinions that makes this even a discussion at all? You understand my point? I guess my positive position would be to say simply, that I believe that when it comes to understanding the natural world religion should embrace what is revealed through the tools of science, and if a challenge to a belief is encountered that the belief should be held loosely and subject to revision. When it comes to understanding our existential response to the world, religion holds a place of non-literal expression of the reality of human experience in the language of mythical symbol. Each is part of the human experience. Each can inform each other and the whole individual. For you, an example of a positive position would be to say for instance, that God reveals spiritual, historical, and scientific truth in the Bible as direct revelation, and as such our understanding of the world and living is best served by subjecting all knowledge to divine revelation. You of course are free to state how you see this. The above can be my position from which to defend, and you can provide yours. I'm spending some extra time on defining this in the interest of being more focused in the actual discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted May 22, 2009 Author Share Posted May 22, 2009 So what kind of parameters do you guys want? Working on that... A limit on the post size? That will be my greatest challenge to come up with! Working on that too.... A limit on the time between responses? Oh damn... I've got a some larger projects coming up with work... so I'm thinking 2 week in between max for me, hopefully quicker as time permits. However, I know that Ray does some sort of missionary-type work so his time may be challenging for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayskidude Posted May 23, 2009 Share Posted May 23, 2009 So what kind of parameters do you guys want? Working on that... A limit on the post size? That will be my greatest challenge to come up with! Working on that too.... A limit on the time between responses? Oh damn... I've got a some larger projects coming up with work... so I'm thinking 2 week in between max for me, hopefully quicker as time permits. However, I know that Ray does some sort of missionary-type work so his time may be challenging for him. I could commit to one post per week for most weeks - but I'm out two weeks in July. And just shooting from the hip - I would posit that God has revealed truth to Man; this truth primarily reveals the Nature & Purposes of God, which would include His reasons for Creation in general and Mankind in particular. When God speaks through His prophets in the Bible regarding science, history, geography, etc - this information is true. Therefore, when we encounter information which seems contrary to Scripture, we need to work diligently to determine how to mesh these together into a harmonious whole. But I'll read up some and develop a better position. Thnx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayskidude Posted May 31, 2009 Share Posted May 31, 2009 So what kind of parameters do you guys want? Working on that... A limit on the post size? That will be my greatest challenge to come up with! Working on that too.... A limit on the time between responses? Oh damn... I've got a some larger projects coming up with work... so I'm thinking 2 week in between max for me, hopefully quicker as time permits. However, I know that Ray does some sort of missionary-type work so his time may be challenging for him. It occurrd to me that you may be waiting on me to post another version of my position. God, who is transcendent & majestic, has created this universe for His Glory and teleological ends. He has created Man in His image & likeness - and given Man the task of discovering the intracacies of His Creation, and He has established nature with it's laws to govern natural operations (though God has and will invade Creation to perform miracles which accomplish His purposes). God has also placed religion with its principles within the heart of all people - causing them to seek for Him. Thus religion and science are complementary aspects of Creation - and are therefore not in conflict. So, when seeming contradictions or inconsistencies appear, we must investigate this problem to harmonize them. Given the four options in the Wiki article - I would go with Integration, but from the Biblical Literalist position. May I suggest an option for us - you recommend a book that you think presents an excellent treatment of this topic. Then we can each read the book one section at a time, and then make our comments on that section. This may help us focus our discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted June 1, 2009 Author Share Posted June 1, 2009 So what kind of parameters do you guys want? Working on that... A limit on the post size? That will be my greatest challenge to come up with! Working on that too.... A limit on the time between responses? Oh damn... I've got a some larger projects coming up with work... so I'm thinking 2 week in between max for me, hopefully quicker as time permits. However, I know that Ray does some sort of missionary-type work so his time may be challenging for him. It occurrd to me that you may be waiting on me to post another version of my position. God, who is transcendent & majestic, has created this universe for His Glory and teleological ends. He has created Man in His image & likeness - and given Man the task of discovering the intracacies of His Creation, and He has established nature with it's laws to govern natural operations (though God has and will invade Creation to perform miracles which accomplish His purposes). God has also placed religion with its principles within the heart of all people - causing them to seek for Him. Thus religion and science are complementary aspects of Creation - and are therefore not in conflict. So, when seeming contradictions or inconsistencies appear, we must investigate this problem to harmonize them. Given the four options in the Wiki article - I would go with Integration, but from the Biblical Literalist position. May I suggest an option for us - you recommend a book that you think presents an excellent treatment of this topic. Then we can each read the book one section at a time, and then make our comments on that section. This may help us focus our discussion. Apologizes for the delay. I've been occupied with things and have only engaged in some lighter posts around here as time and energy permitted. Let me look this over some more as I'd like to pursue a topic in this area. The difficulty is in narrowing the focus. I have however seen you well engaged with others in discussion, so I figured you were pretty occupied with those as it was. I'll focus on this again and come up with a worthwhile area of discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayskidude Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Apologizes for the delay. I've been occupied with things and have only engaged in some lighter posts around here as time and energy permitted. Let me look this over some more as I'd like to pursue a topic in this area. The difficulty is in narrowing the focus. I have however seen you well engaged with others in discussion, so I figured you were pretty occupied with those as it was. I'll focus on this again and come up with a worthwhile area of discussion. I am out-of-town from June 24 - July 4; and then out-of-the country from July 8 -22. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share Posted June 22, 2009 Apologizes for the delay. I've been occupied with things and have only engaged in some lighter posts around here as time and energy permitted. Let me look this over some more as I'd like to pursue a topic in this area. The difficulty is in narrowing the focus. I have however seen you well engaged with others in discussion, so I figured you were pretty occupied with those as it was. I'll focus on this again and come up with a worthwhile area of discussion. I am out-of-town from June 24 - July 4; and then out-of-the country from July 8 -22. OK. I haven't forgotten, just limited in what time I have. Been mulling over more thoughts about it, and it's possible I might make it a more open discussion in the Colosseum. I'm thinking it could be related to what I was hoping to focus on, but would be more interesting to me. Perhaps it can be on the relationship of Faith and Reason. Instead of Science and Religion. I'm sure that would provide some pretty important insights from both sides as to what that means and how we approach them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayskidude Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 OK. I haven't forgotten, just limited in what time I have. Been mulling over more thoughts about it, and it's possible I might make it a more open discussion in the Colosseum. I'm thinking it could be related to what I was hoping to focus on, but would be more interesting to me. Perhaps it can be on the relationship of Faith and Reason. Instead of Science and Religion. I'm sure that would provide some pretty important insights from both sides as to what that means and how we approach them. No worries, mate - just a gentle reminder of my schedule. I am completely amenable to whatever you decide. Thnx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts