definition: par•a•digm (pār'ə-dīm', -dĭm')

3. A set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them, especially in an intellectual discipline.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004.

Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this blog is four-fold:
to recognize that every person functions within a basic paradigm, which affects how all information is processed;
(2) to understand the paradigms of others;
(3) to discuss, in particular, paradigms which are related to science, religion, and philosophy.

(4) to reveal the paradigm shifts in my own life, a process that has completely changed the direction and purpose of my existence.

The purpose of this blog is NOT to convince anyone that their paradigms or beliefs are correct or incorrect. I am hoping for an honest dialog, but the discussions must remain respectful of others, even if there is profound disagreement. If any comments are not respectful, they will be removed.
(Revised 1/13/09)

Sunday, January 20, 2008

The Paradigm of Science

The apparent success of scientific inquiry has led many to assume that all things are ultimately provable. According to this line of reasoning, anything with substance (or mass) should be measurable and, if something is without substance, at least its effects should be measurable and predictable. I know this because I was raised in an academic science household, trained as a scientist, and work in a medical field. I viewed anything of the spiritual world with great skepticism, because it was not part of my experience or the experience of anyone I knew.


wala said...

The definition of the word faith according to Funk and Wagnall’s Standard Dictionary of the English Language is: Belief without evidence.
God is a super being whose only definition is that he is beyond man's power to conceive or understand.
''Scientists don't think that evidence seen by faith is truly evidence; and believers don't think that scientists can see anything that is not physically measurable.''
Science couldn’t physically major Ultraviolet light, there is no physical evidence that such rays exist because we cant see them or feel them but still science believed in the existence of such rays when Johann Wilhelm Ritter woke up one day and dipped gum paper in silver chloride and started exposing it to the different waves of visible light violet, blue, green, yellow, orange, and red.
Trying to find why does sun light make silver salts dark and then he discovered that an invisible ray above violet in wavelength exist and is the cause of the discoloring that happens to silver salts when exposed to sun.
The evidence was physically immeasurable but it was real evidence with logical fundamentals and reasonable thinking.
Now if religious person said that because Mr. x said 2000 years ago that he was the creator of the universe and it is demons that made silver salts get dark when it is exposed to sun, and this religious person felt better with such in explanation then it is a dictate of reason that this spiritual evidence should be denied.
M.Wael Alkel

SS said...

"God is a super being whose only definition is that he is beyond man's power to conceive or understand."-- Not everyone would agree with that definition. Although God is certainly beyond our complete understanding, the Bible shows that He is both accessible and personal, asking His followers to pray to him and promising to answer. There are many passages in the Bible that indicate that he is a loving God, who keeps His promises.
Note these representative passages from the Bible (Old Testament):

"'Call to Me [the Lord], and I will answer you, and show you great and mighty things, which you do not know.'" (Jeremiah 33:3)

"The LORD did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any other people, for you were the least of all peoples; but because the LORD loves you, and because He would keep the oath which He swore to your fathers...." (Deuteronomy 7:7,8a)

Wala stated that "Science couldn't physically measure Ultraviolet light"--I assume you mean that ancient science could not measure it. Modern science can measure ultraviolet light and they know its wavelength. They can also measure its effects. It is invisible, but not immeasurable. Two thousand years ago, though, there were a lot of things that people tried to explain as spiritual occurences, simply because they did not have the technology to detect or measure them: magnetism, gravity, ultraviolet light, etc.

Let me give an example of what I meant by the statement,
"Scientists don't think that evidence seen by faith is truly evidence; and believers don't think that scientists can see anything that is not physically measurable." Let's say that two parents pray that their child be healed of a type of cancer thought to be incurable. Two weeks later, the child is free of cancer. Parents who have faith in the power of God to heal will see their child's healing as evidence that their faith is real. Scientists hearing the story of this child will assume that something totally apart from God allowed the cancer to go into complete remission. They think the supposed "healing" is just coincidental with the prayers. Unless something is reproducible, measurable, and predictable, it is looked upon with extreme skepticism in the scientific community.--See the link to "The Scientific Method":

wala said...

ss you are depending on an ancient book written by a person who was born from a virgin mother then got nailed to a tree so you can explain phenomenon’s that you cant understand, 1000 years ago people thought that the moon is shining because angels live there and they told tales of great prophets and monks building long long ladders to get there, they thought that any unidentified disease is plague and if this illness wasn’t lethal and the person got better then it is a miracle.
Back in 1801 there was no way to major any thing about the ultraviolet rays but its existence was a scientific absolute fact.
In medicine there is no absolute case but there are always chances, some times they are high and some other times they are low, consider it like the lottery:
a group of 100 people entered a lottery with 10$ each and that means each one of them has the chance of 1% to leave with 1000$and this one is going to randomly be chosen if he prayed or he didn’t because if parrying is a factor then lets say 50 of these people prayed then all these 50 should win but at the end of the day science would tell you that prayers had no effect and 1 out of the whole 100 would win.
Prayers aren’t that bad though because they can be an important psychological element to make you hold on to your life and never give up while you are ill.
But as you know people differ in motives and prayers scientifically are useless if they weren’t a psychological factor to trick your mind with a lie that someone is looking after you.
You can’t say that God allowed the cancer to go into complete remission if god is not scientifically proven to exist, it is like me telling you that planes and ships were lost at Bermuda triangle because my elf brother that you cat see is living there and he ate them. and then ill go write a holy book so you can quote from it and prove my words and when coincidences and odds comes by and some one get cured while praying for my brother it will be my brother's work.
Ss everything in this world has a scientific explanation it is just waiting for some one to study then think and find it so don’t dump every thing you cant understand over a fairytale.

SS said...

You described the viewpoint of faith-in-God-as-myth so well that I am going to start a new discussion thread on it. This is the heart of the types of discussions I have been hoping this blog will delve into. Thank you. Now, for my comments on what you have to say, go to the new post. (Give me a little time to organize my thoughts, though.)