The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Did science or God save Dr Kent Brantly from Ebola? > Comments

Did science or God save Dr Kent Brantly from Ebola? : Comments

By Monica Karal, published 19/9/2014

The Sydney Morning Herald article asks why Brantly arrogantly assumed that God deemed him more worthy of saving than the 1400 people who have died of the disease.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15
  16. All
Grateful 22/09 writes: "Extropian1 You say "Science advances, improves, refines, conquers"
What is the object for this sentence? Is it civilisation or culture...or perhaps both?"

The conversation on this topic seems to have significantly diverged from that originally intended.

Did science or god save Kent Brantly?

I provided a logical way of reasoning that science was the agency of the good doctor's recovery to good health. How would the religiously afflicted know that the recovery is full and complete without confirmation from science? Leave science out of the issue and presume he has recovered through a miracle. Without the confirmation, would it be safe to allow him to resume his duties? If you were among the medical staff, believer or unbeliever, would you see it as completely safe to serve beside him? How do you think the patients would react learning that their doctor's "recovery" was put down to a miracle and no medical tests were deemed necessary?
Posted by Extropian1, Thursday, 25 September 2014 11:45:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Grateful, I would be inclined to attempt answers to your questions if they were relevant to the subject and title of the thread concerning Dr. Brantly. Contributors seem to be ignoring the rules and as I have suffered the non-publication of a post to this subject I am doubly conscious of compliance.

I must observe though, that your questions have not much to do with Dr Brantly, scientific methods or miracles.

I confess to a profound skepticism of all things "spiritual". Such concepts exist solely on the presumption that science can never intrude in such a realm. Do you see a synonymy or sharing of traits between "spiritual" and "supernatural"?
Posted by Extropian1, Friday, 26 September 2014 1:20:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And further to Grateful.....You seem to be using a strawman device in your exchanges with Pericles. As for your first questions to me......I ceased answering such ingenuous interrogation in discussion groups 15 years ago.

Justice is an artificial concept devised by humankind. It does not exist in the natural world where humans are absent [except as below]. Our sense of justice was an outgrowth of a sense of fairness. Our judicial system is an outgrowth of our sense of justice. Concepts like justice, fairness, innocence, guilt, co-operation, fellowship have names because humans recognise them as conducive to progress and prosperity in groups and societies. They are found to a degree in chimpanzee society. I recommend the Jane Goodall chimpanzee site for irrefutable evidence supporting my contentions. It may be that the concepts mentioned above will be found in other animals such as elephants and cetaceans.
Posted by Extropian1, Friday, 26 September 2014 2:07:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Grateful writes: "Ethics and humane behaviour, to be products of evolution, would mean a world in which they are profitable, useful endeavours, for "highly evolved animals" in their pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain.

However the fact is crime, notably organised crime and state-sponsored crime against communities and nations, has proven most profitable. Crime pays...unless of course there is a God. Virtue and sacrifice can only be rational if there is a God."

Your use of the word "profitable" in two disparate contexts is a glib resort unworthy of you. Not only do the concepts mentioned in a previous post exist in positive form but their antitheses exist. That some animals, like humans and chimpanzees, harbour a "criminal" element is the very reason for these concepts to exist. They describe thought and behaviour. There can be no doubt that crime is anti-social and inimical to progress and prosperity of society as a whole. The incidence of crime on an industrial and international scale has followed developmental trends. Its cost in relative or per capita terms is little changed since the Industrial Revolution.

The concept of world-wide anarchy, society's unraveling and a new dawn rising from the ashes would profit no one except provide a frisson of martyrdom to a few fanatics.

Virtue and sacrifice are artificial concepts not found in nature where humans are absent. The suggestion of a holy origin is piffle.
Posted by Extropian1, Friday, 26 September 2014 2:46:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thank-you for the thought-provoking and challenging responses. And I acknowledge each one of you as my superior in knowledge and intellect.

I have selected the follow comments for reflection and a response. Please say if you think i have omitted a remark that deserves separate attention or you want to add something.

AJ Philips:

<<Indeed don't Atheists point to the injustice of this world as evidence that there is no God.>>

Injustice is not evidence of no god, it’s just evidence that an omnibenevolent god doesn’t exist. Which is a real problem for the Abrahamic god, wouldn't you think?

Pericles

>>Virtue and sacrifice can only be rational if there is a God.<<

I would be interested to hear your justification for that assertion. What evidence can you offer that shows virtue to be a uniquely God-driven state, as opposed to a rationally-evolved product of the human will to survive?

Extropian 1
“Did science or god save Kent Brantly?”
ANS: For myself, everything is from God: whether we may deem it good, bad or ugly (or a miracle). I like to see you create the disease, the cure let alone the person involved. We’re all His creation. And of course science allows us to know whether or not the person is better.

Extropian 1

I confess to a profound skepticism of all things "spiritual". Such concepts exist solely on the presumption that science can never intrude in such a realm. Do you see a synonymy or sharing of traits between "spiritual" and "supernatural"?
ANS: What is Art
Posted by grateful, Friday, 26 September 2014 6:37:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cont..

Extropian 1
Justice is an artificial concept devised by humankind. It does not exist in the natural world where humans are absent [except as below]. Our sense of justice was an outgrowth of a sense of fairness. Our judicial system is an outgrowth of our sense of justice. Concepts like justice, fairness, innocence, guilt, co-operation, fellowship have names because humans recognise them as conducive to progress and prosperity in groups and societies. They are found to a degree in chimpanzee society. I recommend the Jane Goodall chimpanzee site for irrefutable evidence supporting my contentions. It may be that the concepts mentioned above will be found in other animals such as elephants and cetaceans.

Extropian 1
Virtue and sacrifice are artificial concepts not found in nature where humans are absent. The suggestion of a holy origin is piffle.
Posted by grateful, Friday, 26 September 2014 6:37:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  14. 14
  15. 15
  16. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy