Science and Faith.-their applications to truth.

New "Essay"-
-------------

Science and Faith.-their applications to truth.


Science is comparable to us... because we developed it. As is Faith. And though faith is necessary in science (its applications) , Faith has no need for science.

Science can be proven 'Right or Wrong'-using rational thought processes.

Faith cannot.-Faith can be proven 'Right or Wrong' only by applying 'ethical' thought processes. (such as harm to another being: as an example of 'unethical'.)


What science proves wrong... is wrong according to science, and nothing more. Because we have such a severe reliance on the rules of cause and effect (logic, rationalization, 1+1=2), we often presume that anything proven wrong by science, is wrong universally. Which is not true.


Faith possessed solely by human beings:

The earth and all of its inhabitants (minus ourselves), are perfectly capable of existing without human interactions. The reason being; is because everything within nature abides by the rules of cause and effect. Driven solely on instinct and the physical factors involved in their life/or existence. Oxygen...Gravity- Everything we have a name for (apart from ourselves) is perfect in its existing. ' To error is human'.

Human beings are the only creatures on earth who could destroy themselves and the rest of life on this planet, sometimes without even realizing it! Which is why faith is required. Humans can do such damage to earth simply because we are able to choose. Faith can lead to our destruction or salvation, just as science.-but relying too heavily on one can desecrate an entire existence, and leave us asking 'why'?


We are able to choose, because we don't know the outcome of any action or any decision. Nature is capable of adapting to such a thing because it follows cause and effect. It doesn't deter from its course.-but rather does what it must, and only that. It can heal itself and the human race, but it cannot choose to do otherwise.-Humans on the other hand, can. Humans can nurture or destroy nature. This is a widely understood point.

We choose because we can base our decisions outside of existing cause and effect factors(Faith).
We can choose because we don't know, and we can have faith because we don't know. I suppose if faith exists in 'every' choice we make...than 'Faith' isn't really a choice. Well, its required to 'choose'-so without it, you wouldn't have freewill. - and without it, you would fall victim to cause and effect. Which can be either a good or bad thing. But what's 'really' going to cook your noodle, is that we humans couldn't fall victim to cause and effect, simply because 'we don't know enough.'


The paradox I'm attempting to explain...is that we can choose, but we cant choose to 'NOT' choose.


*in simplified form...




This 'paradox' exists everywhere. It only poses a problem...when we make it one. When we label it. 'Paradox, 'Contradictory'...etc.

My theory is, that because everything is infinite (or connected..w/e) that by limiting it with science, and equations-we contradict its very existence. We cant limit life. It is..what it is. When we run across things like...

'We don't know because we can choose, and we choose because we don't know'

...things that make complete sense...(only when implementing faith remember thatJ)


..we reach logics limits. The end of a logical thought process wrapped around infinite. Where beginning meets end, and end meets beginning. These phrases and ideas make no logical sense-until you add faith to the equation. Science would look at the phrase above^ and say...'this makes no sense.'.

Because it tries to put a limit on the unlimited and infinite.-this is why it doesn't make 'logical' sense. Now with faith...it makes absolute sense. Because it becomes 'faith'....implemented with 'Logic'.


We can destroy ourselves via faith-or science. -but because science requires faith (to make full proof 'sense'.) than faith is what will ultimately save, or destroy us. And its up to us to choose....life or death?

.

So if a dream world exists- do you suppose that this "dream world" would effect a persons choices..?

Placing them outside of measurable bounds by what you say..."is the top of the food chain"..?

I think you mistake our necessity for planet earth, as the only underlying factor that we are part of nature.-i never said we were above nature...i simply stated that all things within in it-except ourselves...cannot conciously destroy what they :"need".

and if faith and science are things "we" need...as well as them being the causes for our destruction-then i most certainly dont think that your "sitting back and chill" technique will benefit us..or the earth and nature.


If science and faith are both part of nature(both characteristics the human species share) than you cant say they wont "bring us answers"...or arent required. and if we do infact have our own "dream world"-we wouldnt conciously fall victim to the consequences of our actions in the ..."real world". Again, i ask--what is the middle plane between science and faith. If both are a part of cause and efffect/nature...then i suppose your referencing a world other than the one that any of us live in.
You viewed "faith" as preventing "/seeing the truth...you claim science is similar to faith..----"those who dont realize all there answers are laid out before them."----As if, there looking elsewhere outside the real world..


You practically made my point.-but you only demonstrated one side.-->faith is implemented in science..and also, faith can prevent you from realizing the truth.

People talk down on faith because they think it is useless but what people don't realise is that faith can be good or evil. Hitler's faith caused him to try to wipe out the Jews. Now had we said faith was bad and stopped people from exercising it there would not have been a war (just massacre) because those leading the rebellion were also acting out of faith. Mother Theresa was a woman considered great by most and she acted out of faith but some here might consider her to be blinded to truth. Faith does not blind anybody; it is beliefs that blind people. One must believe in order to have faith one does not have faith in order to believe.

How does faith work as nuetral? I suppose because the human species often view things in black and white.."good or bad"-that the "nuetral" ground is our application of faith "unknowingly". Or what we percieve to be.."inactive".


idk

..i couldnt prove you wrong.



The same reason we are condemned to choose, is the same reason we are condemned "NOT" to know everything.

and the same reason we are condemned not to know everything, is the same reason we are condemned to choose..

Whats the reason...?

science/logic deals in certainties, faith does not. I cannot logically tell you you're right or wrong, but this does not mean you arent either.(Right or Wrong)


it doesn't mean you are"Neutral"



think about it


given you beleive in faith, you must agree with the above^. That because we're talking about an "unknown/immeasurable" field of choice, we can only place these(choices), in either of two categories: Good or Bad. Because with a choice,...its only one-or the other.

No Choice was ever made "Neutrally".
Whether Conciously,Subconciously, or Unconciously.

like i said; -You cant choose, to -"Not choose".

.

For simplification purposes I will remove the word neutral from my previous post. Becuase when it comes down to it only good or evil matter anyway.

So if a dream world exists- do you suppose that this "dream world" would effect a persons choices..?" -"What is this blabbering of yours? A dream world effecting a persons choices, thats about as logical as the blue sky making your bread taste sweet. WTF?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---

You claimed a "dream world" exists. Given we all live in this world(the one we come together in) which falls more measurably suseptible to "cause and effect", our dream world would consist of things not of this world...-which discerns the difference between the two.

..understand yet?-

and because this is true, (and you also stated a person can/is/will be blinded by their "dream world" a person could quite possibly implement factors from their "dream world" into the world we come together in. Leaving the possibility of measurable outcomes...limited. - it was more or less a rhetorical question...and its funny how i expected you to answer it, but you couldnt even do that.

i'll be happy to elaborate...more thoroughly.-but its beating a dead horse:/.
-------------------------

"Placing them outside of measurable bounds by what you say..."is the top of the food chain"..? " What or who is "them"?"
---------------------------------------------

When i say us, or we, or you, or me...or "them".-im most usually referring to people wraith. I also referenced your statement on .."the top of the food chain"-which went in context with human beings in your previous post.
-------------------------------------------------------------------


----------------------------------------

"here is somethign that makes a little bit of sense. However, you do not seem to understand that there is no order to what is natural. If it is then it is natural. Locusts devour feilds and we blow cities up. It is proportional."
------------------------------------------

locusts eat/devour because they must do so to survive. they arent conciously out to hurt anything/one. -again..i reiterate "concious". Blowing up buildings, and eating to survive are two entirely different things.
------------------------------------------------------
benefit us" again you seem to think there is any gain in a world were all is "one".
_________________

Come now. Im human wraith. How else could i demonstrate such a simple thing...without the use of the word.."benefit"?

But since you ask- its not so much gaining, "its making up for". Its the self-centered single focus which prys to separate each .."individual". Preventing unity and creating conflict. Every single one of us is guilty of such a thing, and very few are willing to attempt a change in it. Some try their hardest in hope of a better existence( for everyone). "Nuetral and chill" went out the window a long time ago. Back when choice and freewill became implemented into nature, back when the human race introduced math and specified limitations on life, When "we", as human beings, started wanting to control everything simply because our standards of living had surpassed necessity. When "Existing" is no longer enough. We develop unreasonable and unrealistic expectations. So out of touch with what..is NEEDED, that we have no idea what we need-and have only our expectations as a substitute. We compare and draw conclusions, we isolate and separate ourselves from one another. When we COMPARE ourselves with the rest of the world, we make a concious choice to operate outside/or against the rest of the world. And when a million people are working toward a million different opposing goals/ideals, the world becomes a hell of a place, and 'much' of necessity becomes neglected. What once was unified, is now nonexistent. It is no longer easy to "chill" or 'relax'..- it takes an extreme and concious effort. A "selfless" act to Compromise and regain what was lost. Faith is necessary simply because, no one knows whats going to happen next.-which is also why we make mistakes. No single person has an adequate concept of life or existence. Only a concept of what they 'know'.. Compassion aids in expanding a persons P.O.V. and becomes most necessary in aiding in any form of compromise. We compromise because Its the Right thing to do. Regardless of whether or not we know the outcome of any situation, we should do the right thing. In order to regain what we've lost, we must lose what we've chosen to take its place. We lack "certainties" -but yet we strive so hard for them(knowledge-pre-determination(future events) desire to control the fate of "all things' to an end). and we do nothing but fall short.

-in this world we are never lacking, Only losing what we have in hope of gaining what we dont.

-such as Freewill for knowledge.-and visa versa.
-some is good.-some is bad.

The difference is, that Good will allow you to see the truth. To know this balance. Evil does not. Evil will blind you from the truth, and have you unaware of that fact. Egotism.Selfishness.(no biblical references here) but the meanings implemented behind these words ring true-as does the logic behind all i've presented. Evil/bad/wrong.. Creates a long and hard road back to satisfaction via necessity. and if that isnt natural, i dont know what is.

Your right about one thing.."Simplicity' is in everything. But complexity, IS everything"... to a single person/thing.

-and the only "thing" in existence comparing and drawing conclusions...is the human race.

i dont know what your trying to do... Maybe prevent me from continueing writing, and I apologize if i havent been exactly "clear" on some of the things i state. But its all there-

and if you need assistance, you can point out specifics..i'll be more than happy to elaborate as needed. Just please, dont call it blabber-simply state that you dont understand... and i'll be glad to reiterate it for you. i implore you once again, to keep your outrageous claims, and vague assumptions of mine(or any others) works to a minimum. Thanks.


..also-if there is no "best road"-why are you asking me( to say the absolute least..) to deter from my current route?
As if yours is any better...
What is your reason?

i completly agree with you ekimup. science isn't enough.. we need faith too.. i think its about finding a balance, sorry i didnt have time to read the thing about dreams you and wraith are talking about but i will later..

faith exists in everything because,like dude said, we dont know anything in a universe of infinate possibilities. even the simplest actions in life are made in faith. science is faith. dosent make faith the answer, tho, or even the path to it. just makes it inevitable due to the nonexistance of certainties. answers do not presuppose existance, neither does direction. still its fun to look.

Well because faith requires the absents of certainty, the fact that it is utilized in obtaining..knowledge.....is ironic.