• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Kelvin's conundrum: Is it possible to believe in God and science?

Free episodes:

Like I always say, a God is simply something that has been deified, and that requires a deifier. No deifier = no God. So we can still have universe makers and still have no God. Or we can have an ancient culture who deifies the Sun, and we'll have ourselves a Sun God. We can also have scientists who deify universe makers, and therefore we'd have both science and God. Hypothetically we could also have people who deify scientists, making the scientists Gods.
 
I don't see that the atheist's complete lack of hard proof as to God's nonexistence is any stronger than the theist's complete lack of hard proof etc. etc.

It's the old "Barbell Equation": 0=0

The difference is that if there *is* a God, behaving morally matters. If there isn't, *nothing* does. There is no risk involved in faith and good behavior- but there certainly is in living down to your lowest impulses. If the human race ever suddenly got *proof* that nothing matters, there would be a Saturnalia of destruction and the end of all hope of civilization. If there ever were proof that there is a God, the worst aftereffect... is people would be trying to live better lives.

Actually science has found a better answer

'Altruism Gene' Associated With Higher Willingness to Donate, Researchers Find
Nov. 8, 2010 — Do you like to do good things for other people? If so, your genes might be responsible for this. At least, the results of a study conducted by researchers of the University of Bonn suggest this. According to the study, a minute change in a particular gene is associated with a significantly higher willingness to donate. People with this change gave twice as much money on average to a charitable cause as did other study subjects.



The results have now been published in the journal Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience.

But new research suggests that altruism may be hardwired.

'Altruism gene' associated with higher willingness to donate, researchers find

Altruism gene discovered: generosity explained by science
 
There’s an age long question that even some of history’s greatest free thinkers, philosophers and theologists haven’t been able to answer – are humans good in nature? Many have tried to seek answers to this riddling puzzle, and for many the conclusion was a gloomy one – that man is simply doomed to stray the world in selfish agony or that only divine intervention itself can redeem the inherent wickedness of mankind. Can this question be answered by science, though?

7 studies and over 2,000 study participants point to the fact that humans are generally well intended. Helping our peers seems to be our first instinct, an evolutionary gimmick that help our race both survive and evolve

at our very core, each of us, with small exceptions, we’re all kind at heart. At least that’s what science tells us.
Findings were published in the journal Nature.


Humans are wired to be good in nature, science findings prove
 
Can a Darwinian be a Christian?: The Relationship between Science and Religion: Michael Ruse: 9780521637169: Amazon.com: Books

Can someone who accepts Darwin's theory of natural selection subscribe at the same time to the basic tenets of Christianity? Adopting a balanced perspective on the subject, Michael Ruse argues that, although it is at times difficult for a Darwinian to embrace Christian belief, it is not inconceivable. Ruse has produced an important contribution to a sometimes overheated debate for anyone interested in seeking an informed and judicious guide to these issues. Michael Ruse is professor of philosophy and zoology at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada. He is the author of many books on evolutionary biology. In addition, he has published several hundred articles and many book reviews. He is the editor of the Cambridge Series in the Philosophy of Biology and founding editor of the journal IBiology & Philosophy. Hb ISBN (2000): 0-521-63144-0
 
Back
Top