){kind=link}
Dr. Tony Jack explores the question of whether or not a Scientist can be religious in his 2015 TEDxCLE talk.
Anthony Jack has a BA in Psychology and Philosophy from Oxford University, and a PhD in Experimental Psychology from University College London. He then trained in Cognitive Neuroscience at the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, UCL, London and the Dept. of Neurology, Washington University in St. Louis Medical School. Since 2007 he has been leading the Brain, Mind and Consciousness lab at Case Western Reserve University. In 2014 Dr Jack also became the Research Director of the Inamori International Center for Ethics and Excellence.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at http://ted.com/tedx
My biggest confusion is the very idea of believing a religion is to think of it as the absolute truth. But, when every religion claims themselves to be the absolute truth, then which one actually is? The possibilities are that there is one, or not at all. AND if there is, let's say Christianity is. Doesn't it mean God is very rude and discriminative since there are countries like North Korea and Saudi Arabia in which people won't be exposed to the religion at all in their life?
I position myself to be very neutral and I'm going to accept every explanation. I used to be very religious and with many questions in mind, now I question my belief and I definitely need help to know the actual truth.
17:09, you can't deny, the religious folk are in pretty good company.
When it comes to atheists and Christians, both believe what they think is fact. But truthfully, it’s all just belief.
We do not know how the universe started. The Big Bang is possible, but still just belief. The existence of god is possible, but also still just belief.
And we do need to stop disrespecting each other for what we believe in.
I knew scientists can still have faith in the bible/Tor’ah/Quran while they look of alternative answers in science. New a honest man will show up.
So if our brain functions through logic and empathy distinctively, which of the two pathways is reliable to establish the truth?
Where did existence come from
As Cristopher Hitchens nicely put up and I agree… Religion is a toy and you should play it FOR YOURSELF AND ONLY FOR YOURSELF. Don't expect others to respect your plaything and don't force others to play with it too.
Science has become another deluded religion. Or maybe it always was. Science is not your trust in science! It doesn't matter how many times science was right! Science deserves not trust because science is not about faith! You only know something if you've done it yourself. That is science. I found the answer about the universe you all seek. There's much more than we can see with our own eyes. Death is not the end. I wrote a book about my discovery. Hope you can put some faith in a new genius of our time, I'm not famous yet, but the time will come. You can help too.
Science is a very valuable tool. But it still cannot explain where the smallest molecular units came from. The information about molecular units is still beyond research. Where did the structure of these electrons, neutrons, protons come from?
“The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.”
― Werner Heisenberg
12:51: your lifespan, health ect. will be better if you think the same as people around you!
But please get the same data from a mostly religious unaffiliated country, I bet believers have a shorter lifespan than non believers because they are different than most of the people around them. Disagreements cause stress and stress causes a shorter lifespan.
Never trust statistics you didn’t fake on your own.
This is not a fact, it just shows health, lifespan, ect. depends on how much you agree or disagree with people around you
Hmm some interesting studies. I'm very interested in knowing how you went about in the studies . I wonder if I would come with the same results if I conduted these experiments. How can I inquire to learn more??
He turned me off by stating that analytical thinking is cold and spiritual thinking is warm. In me both are warm. I smell an agenda.
BALANCE is key.
If Christianity were true would you become a Christian? Christ either rose from the dead or he did not. This was a good talk about the distinction between science and religion, but if you are truly seeking God in truth then much more study is required and if honest and open this will lead you to Christ.
Now the question becomes whether you'd indulge religious thinking for the sake of living longer. For someone with the knowledge of how the all mighty God gradually shrunk to the God of the gap along these recent centuries, it sounds particularly difficult to practice such a way of thinking. Whatever miracle from which he finds place for God may soon be explained by the latest scientific advancement, if someone loves the pursuit of factual and proven knowledge deep enough, he would be willing to trade it with a few years of his life expectancy.
ATHEISTS ARE SEETHING
lol. Tony acts as if psychopathy is necessarily negative. He is being quite deceptive.
1) Primary psychopathy is the affective aspects of psychopathy; a lack of empathy for other people and tolerance for antisocial orientations.
2) Secondary psychopathy is the antisocial aspects of psychopathy; rule breaking and a lack of effort towards socially rewarded behavior.
Too much empathy is actually a bad thing and can lead to negative moral outcomes. Certain levels of antisocial behavior are necessary for avoiding groupthink and breaking new ground to prevent stagnation. Too much reliance on social rewards means acquiescing in the status quo of the group–which may have negative consequences.
Careers with highest levels of psychopathy.
CEO
Lawyer
Media (TV/radio)
Salesperson
Surgeon
Journalist
Police officer
Clergy
Chef
Civil servant