Originally Posted By: Orac

So that is my reasoning for seperating GOD from science feel free to chime in.


In my opinion, we have to think of life (our existence), before we think about the role of God in science. It is the 'consciousness' that makes us different from other animals. Is 'consciousness' an evolutionary edge that we have when compared to other animals? Or is it some extra-fitting that was given solely to us?

Both science and philosophy depend on our 'consciousness'. The science part deals with 'what the world is'. The philosophical part deals with 'how we should live (behave)in this world'. In the former, we can have an answer (ultimately arrive at the truth). In the latter, we can have only opinions (cannot arrive at the truth).

Regarding science, we can (hope to) arrive at the truth logically. However, if life and consciousness have 'any connection with God', then God can interfere with our efforts to understand the truth of the physical world; ie, God will have role in science. If life and consciousness are the 'qualities of matter', then God will have no role in science. However, HE can still remain as a spectator enjoying the game.

Regarding the existence of God, we can have only opinions, and can never logically arrive at the truth. If the universe is self-consistent, then it is like God. Then those who believe in God can say, "God created the universe in his own form as his image, ie, the cosmos is a part of him". Those who do not believe in God can say, "the self consistency is a proof that God does not exist". In my opinion, both the arguments are equally logical.