<p>The Bible. Completely forgot to talk about the Bible. I have never read the Bible, but from what I understand, there are several passages that are very open to interpretation. The fact that so many interpretations can exist from a single passage is part of “confusion”, if you so call it. If I have an interpretation of the Bible, and someone else has their own interpretation and is acting in a manner that I do not believe in, what am I supposed to do? May I voice my opinions? May I protest? A sensitive response towards other’s behavior is necessary for tolerance, and yet again, there is a fine line between what can and cannot be done. For example, the Westboro Baptist Church. If you do not know about them, you must watch the BBC documentary by Louis Theroux. I cannot believe that so much hatred and disrespect can exist. Although I certainly do not agree with the church’s beliefs, they are allowed to believe in it. But the manner with which they protest and demonstrate their beliefs is, in my opinion, rude and completely uncalled for. Thus, interpretations of the Bible add to the differences of opinion in the debate between religion, science, and many things really.</p>
<p>Holocene and anyone else in this discussion, thoughts about my post on page 233?</p>
<p>@norwhale I wholeheartedly agree, I think religion’s purpose is to provide morals and encourage love between people, but those judgemental individuals provide a much different image of religion (Christianity in particular). I am very Catholic and do believe in the good of religion, but also of accepting others’ beliefs, judging them not from their religion, but the content of their character.
As for the post on the Bible, that is also true, it can be interpreted very symbolically. I, in a sense, do believe in the story of Adam and Eve and Creationism, but in a way that accepts science somewhere in there. I think science and religion are not mutually exclusive.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Aww thanks bud. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thanks, but I can’t take credit. I read it in one of the many anthropology articles I nerdily read in my spare time 
It’s not a belief so much as the result of a study.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Now we’re getting into 2 things: science/religion as a governing body and as a belief system.</p>
<p>With regards to government, I agree that religion’s first fundamental purpose was to govern society and provide a sense of order. This can be evidenced by religion’s tendency to set up rules/“morals” and by religion’s tendency to echo the morals of the time period in which each particular religion was created/discovered/whatever. Religion provided a sense of order and community. I, however, do not think that the important part of this was the supernatural part. Rather, the interesting bit is that humans have the will and desire to create a social structure among ourselves. When we had little knowledge, this had to be done based upon revelations/religion. As science has advanced, we have been able to incorporate many discoveries into our laws - environmental reform, etc. However, I would like to stress that science is * not * comparable to religion in the sense that it is a form of government. Science is the practice of seeking answers in accordance with natural law. These answers do not provide for regulations the way that religion does. I guess the main thing I am trying to say here is that I see religion as something that was developed as a government - it just went a bit further than secular governments. </p>
<p>Now, with regards to belief, there really are ONLY two options: science and religion. I suppose this would make religion the de facto second best option. The reason I say this is because science is based on substantiated, gathered evidence. Any sort of gathered evidence in the natural world will be classified as science, whether preliminary data or a final report. Religion is, by definition, not provable in the natural world. Thus, it is the only thing that lies outside of science and it is hard to draw a parallel between the two, especially because so many people blend the two, like Adodie.</p>
<p>Anyway, that’s my 2 cents about that.</p>
<p>Hello fellow SCEAers! I’ve been lurking on this thread long enough, I figure I may as well join in.</p>
<p>First I like to give a shout out to @norwhale - your playlist is AWESOME! And thanks for introducing me to Spotify (to this point, I’d only used pandora).</p>
<p>As for the religion topic here’s a post I saw on facebook the other day that I thought said it pretty well (with a little humor too 
):
"Being an atheist is okay.
Being an atheist and shaming religions and spirituality as silly and not real is not okay.</p>
<p>Being a Christian is okay.
Being a racist, homophobic, misogynistic, or otherwise hateful person in the name of Christianity is not okay.</p>
<p>Being a reindeer is okay.
Bullying and excluding another reindeer because he has a shiny red nose is not okay."</p>
<p>Only 39.5 hours to go (hopefully)!</p>
<p>@norwhale I agree with your sentiments, for the most part. Religion wouldn’t cause nearly so many problems if people followed the simple tenet of allowing others to believe whatever they chose. The problem is that this would make new conversions extremely difficult for religions, and so the vast majority of religions go out and try and convert others, often when they’re too young to really commit to that magnitude of belief. Since that’s their main method of growth, I, sadly, don’t see that happening from the institutions themselves. I do, however, see it increasing in individuals on a daily basis. The number of civil discussions I’ve been able to have about it, free from attempts at conversion, just to try and understand each other’s a bit more, is something I’m extremely happy about, because it means that people are really considering religion, and that the one they believe in is the one they truly believe in and can benefit from. Just accepting a religion without thought, at least to me, seems rather pointless. What religion can give people, the guidance and answers, only come with actual investment. Seeing people be civil and thoughtful about religion means that they can get that benefit (and I mean on both sides).</p>
<p>@Chubby : are u srs?</p>
<p>may the Lord bless all of your souls</p>
<p>and 40 hours</p>
<p>I think that religion has evolved into a different animal than it once was. It has at least for me. I am Jewish, but I am not Jewish in the traditional sense. I guess now it is commonly called “Reform Judaism”. I think that today religion has moved away from people solely connected by the belief in a similar and ultimate God or gods, and has moved towards a group of people held together by tradition. I do not truly believe that God and Moses physically parted the Red Sea, because I do not think that that is scientifically possible. However, I still celebrate Passover in a somewhat traditional way. For me, religion is to celebrate those before us and honor their beliefs, not necessarily agree with them. If you do, then I have no problem, just as long as it doesn’t infringe on anyone else’s opinions or freedoms. Judaism, among my friends and family, has moved to be more cultural rather than “religious”.</p>
<p>If there is a God though, I like to think that he/she/it is more of a timekeeper. He/she/it wound up the watch of the universe, and let it go naturally. The idea of predestination bothers me, and so does the possibility that there is something out there that could affect the world I live in for any reason he/she/it deems worthy.</p>
<p>Wat happened to this thread…</p>
<p>Do you guys think that one day science may trump religion? Another interesting thought I’ve had in my mind. I feel like there has been so much scientific and technological process that at some point, it has to run out. That will be in the very distant future, but one day we’ll have answers to all the questions and solutions to all the problems. But then will there even be new questions and problems to solve? And finally, materialism. What we need versus what we want. I feel like technology is just increasing our perception of what we want, and preventing us from living with what we need. I don’t know a life without Facebook, computers, or cellphones. Basically, I wish I could experience it. Social experiment anyone?</p>
<p>Humanity will end before science answers all of the answerable questions on Earth. And regardless, there is more microevolution happening every year than we will ever be able to keep up with. </p>
<p>Materialism is ingrained in our species. It would take some serious evolution to get rid of it - not likely since materialism is not a mitigating factor in the ability to reproduce. </p>
<p>I don’t think science’s biggest/greatest contributions have to do with technology. To me, the biggest things are in medicine and improvement of quality of life (some of this was via technology though).</p>
<p>You speak the truth.</p>
<p>We’re almost there guys(: Just a bit more~</p>
<p>this thread is longer than anything…</p>
<p>I think we set the record for the longest thread on College Confidential. Report this to the Guinness Book of World Records.</p>
<p>because we are awesome like that :))
I always thought CC is a bad website to be on but now I’m addicted to this thread xD</p>
<p>LOL xD out of all the bad websites out there this is most definitely one of the better ones(:</p>
<p>Definitely depends on the thread and the college. Haven’t plugged my playlist in a while, so if you haven’t already, here you go. </p>
<p>[Great</a> BIG Indie Playlist by Nora Tan on Spotify](<a href=“http://open.spotify.com/user/122900468/playlist/08NHSHG1AKrAZkfnhuhvXO]Great”>Great BIG Indie Playlist - playlist by Nora | Spotify)</p>
<p>@jk no, I’m just pointing out that none of us have any experience with university admissions and have no idea what goes on in the process. Even if we could, one piece of information gives us very little to go on.</p>
<p>No point thinking about it any more, especially since the actual decision will be out in a couple days.</p>