Re: Scientific approach to God and such

Delmar England (
Sun, 02 Nov 1997 11:28:39 -0500

Since I already posted a response to the article in focus on 10\30\97, I
will be brief.

At 10:27 PM 10/30/97 -0800, you (Hara Ra) wrote:
>(taken from another email list...)
>and yet another somewhat interesting article in the l.a. times:
>October 29, 1997
>Study Suggests Brain May Affect Religious Response
>>From a Times Staff Writer
>New Oreleans- No one knows why humanity felt its first religious
>but researchers at UC San Diego reported Tuesday that the human brain
>may be
>hard-wired to hear the voice of heaven, in what researchers said was the
>first effort to directly address the neural basis of religious
Since literally all of my experiences lead me to conclude that actual
identification of an entity (physical quantity) or a relationship is by
objective differentiation, I must necessarily adhere to this criteria unless
or until someone or something reveals it as error. The article in question
evidences no recognition of such criteria. There is no definitive
differentiation between scientific and non scientific, nor any
differentiation between religious and non religious, nor any differentiation
of "God" as an objectively identifiable entity; indeed, there looms the
everpresent question: How does one mentally abstract an "infinte god" in
absence of limited quantity, a pre-requisite for identification of a thing?
If one knows something is true, one will also feel that it is true. However,
this does not work in reverse as seems to be a popular notion.

For further analysis of the alleged "scientific research", see the
aforementioned post of 10\30\97.

Delmar England