skvangs Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Hey guys, recently I was talking to my buddies and the subject of god came up. My friends were saying that the majority of doctors would NOT believe in god, I saying that they were wrong, and many would believe in god. My dad is a physician and I asked him what he thought. He said that as a doctor you see a whole bunch of things that you can't explain, and that even though medicine is very scientific study, many doctors would believe in a "higher power". So I am curious what do you guys think? I'll tell u what I think, after getting some responses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneDay Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I always disliked the whole science vs. religion debate. It seems that many people think it is one or the other. Being a scientist, and an individual who believes in god, I have been given the "look" by many people, followed by "aren't you in science". Why do others find it so odd that a science student, a doctor etc... would have faith/believe in a higher power? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newguy? Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 My dad is a physician and I asked him what he thought. He said that as a doctor you see a whole bunch of things that you can't explain, and that even though medicine is very scientific study, many doctors would believe in a "higher power". Sounds like agnostic to me. The reason you may get a "look" is because belief in God requires a "leap of faith", whereas science fundamentally does not, even though in some areas it persists today. The two ideas (or whatever you want to call it) differ on this basis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_spaghetti_monster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind#Hovind.27s_.24250.2C000_offer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Hell no. Religion terrifies me, to put it mildly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thejuice Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I don't think that being a physician predisposes you to being either atheist or religious. I think these are two completely unrelated fields and should be treated as such. In my opinion however, I prefer not to label that which I can't explain as the work of god or magic. Personally, if I don't understand why something happened, I would say that I don't know why it happened rather than say that it was the work of some guy with a beard on a cloud(Christian stereotype). I do not believe in god, however a physicians choice in religious is his own personal business as long as it does not effect his ability to properly practice medicine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Cave Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 100% Athiest. See you in hell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest begaster Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I oscillate between being an agnostic deist and an agnostic atheist. I don't think it's possible to know if I'm correct (ergo - agnostic) but, depending on my mood, I sometimes feel there may be something out there, and sometimes feel there probably isn't. It's such a laid back position, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Hi NewGuy, I believe in One God. Plus, I don't think the sciences/ medicine has anything to do with one's beliefs - for me it hasn't. -Batman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 There are plenty of scientists that believe in God. Science relies on the fact that experiments are reproducible. You see a theory, well - you can test the facets of the theory for yourself and determine whether the evidence is in support of it. With religion, you cannot do that. You can only reason and critically think about the existence of God(s)... but that is not enough in science. You need to be able to experiment and test a theory. That's not to say that philosophy is incorrect... it just does things differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skvangs Posted January 30, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Thanks guys, so I guess in general, so far most have stated that either they are atheist, and the rest have said that they believe in a higher power. My personal opinion is such that I believe that science and spirituality (religion) go together, and I fail to see why they can't continue to go that way. I do believe in God. I want to continue to read others' comments, so please continue to add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
its_a_conspiracy Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Personally I'm more inclined towards the existentialist viewpoint. I'd like to like of myself as more of a rational and critical thinker who requires empirical evidence, and have great difficulty believing something based on faith alone. Call me a pessimist, but I don't think I am that. However, I think that whether you are religious and whether you choose to become a physician are two seperate things, and that whatever your beliefs may be (religious/atheist/agnostic/existentialist etc.), it does not affect how you perform your duties as a physician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avenir001 Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 lol i always think scientists should belive in God more than anyone...how could learning more about the complexity & organization of the universe and life at every level lead one to doubt there is a higher power behind it all? there are some ridiculous theories in science especially about how it all got started and where we've come from...sure there may be some evidence for these theories, but they're in no way unequivocal...science leaves us with many more questions than answers...it will never give us all the answers and scientists don't necessarily want to have all the answers (they need jobs too)...so to continue to believe in these theories despite their weaknesses does also require a "leap of faith". i do believe in a God who created us and made us special as human beings, giving us awareness and brilliant minds with the potential to learn and advance like no other species...and i think it's ironic that many of us use these gifts to disprove his existence and convince ourselves and others that the world and life as we know it today just somehow "happened" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneDay Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Well stated avenir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daryn Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 I am an atheist when it comes to whether we have One Religion As The Universal Truth. However, I am indifferent in terms of spirituality. Actually, I believe that science is relatively comfortable with grey areas, while religion does not. Religion likes things clear cut and set in stone. This may be something that appeals to certain masses, but to me personally, it frightens me. Now spirituality is another matter altogether. The human element (which I believe could be corrupted) is taken away and all you have left is a connection with the world/society/whatever. That belief that religion was built on originally does not conflict with science, or medicine, or empirical thought, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Well, I just think scientists need to stay open minded about possibilities. Those on the extremes, in my opinion are crazy. How can you be so religious that you deny any scientific progress? How can you be so atheist, given the incredible nature of our universe and our inability to even address the question? I'm religious myself, and I do admit - sometimes when I'm learning stuff in my biochem classes, I'm just hit with awe. How could it be so complicated and not designed? Of course, I think about evolution - and it's obvious how much support there is for that... but it is evident that we are missing key pieces of information. In the end, it all comes down to a philosophical preference and what one feels is more possible. To me, I cannot imagine that this entire universe is completely random. I just don't see that as a possible. To others, it's more than possible! Again - preferences, and to each his or her own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orchid Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 hey Avenir well said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest begaster Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 lol i always think scientists should belive in God more than anyone...how could learning more about the complexity & organization of the universe and life at every level lead one to doubt there is a higher power behind it all? there are some ridiculous theories in science especially about how it all got started and where we've come from...sure there may be some evidence for these theories, but they're in no way unequivocal...science leaves us with many more questions than answers...it will never give us all the answers and scientists don't necessarily want to have all the answers (they need jobs too)...so to continue to believe in these theories despite their weaknesses does also require a "leap of faith". i do believe in a God who created us and made us special as human beings, giving us awareness and brilliant minds with the potential to learn and advance like no other species...and i think it's ironic that many of us use these gifts to disprove his existence and convince ourselves and others that the world and life as we know it today just somehow "happened" See, I've never understood this line of reasoning. You posit that the universe is far too complex and intricate to have come about on its own. Therefore, a God is required to have made it. Yet, wouldn't a God able to create such a magnificently complex universe out of nothing be far more complex? Which just leads to the question of what created him, ad infinitum. And if you state that He has always been, then why could the universe not have just always been as well (if not ours, at least the energy and matter that it's composed of)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vip_138 Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 In the spirit of an old friend: lol i always think scientists should belive in God more than anyone... no they shouldn't, and the fact that you just said that means you're not a scientist how could learning more about the complexity & organization of the universe and life at every level lead one to doubt there is a higher power behind it all? because i use superior logic and reasoning skills there are some ridiculous theories in science especially about how it all got started and where we've come from...sure there may be some evidence for these theories, but they're in no way unequivocal... I'm sorry but you seem to not understand basic ideas, which makes me question whether you're a scientist again. science leaves us with many more questions than answers... does it? ...it doesn't btw it will never give us all the answers and scientists don't necessarily want to have all the answers (they need jobs too)... No, after we're done figuring out everything, and trust me, we will very soon, scientists (aka moi) will spend the rest of our time disproving stupid ppl that don't believe us (aka you) so to continue to believe in these theories despite their weaknesses does also require a "leap of faith". do they? ...they don't btw i do believe in a God who created us and made us special as human beings, giving us awareness and brilliant minds with the potential to learn and advance like no other species... what about the weasel, they're pretty crafty? eh? why do you think we use the term 'weasel out of things'? eh? and i think it's ironic that many of us use these gifts to disprove his existence and convince ourselves and others that the world and life as we know it today just somehow "happened" I find it funny how wrong you are. I'm sorry, but you're simply WRONG. Now your whatever-degree is no match for my PhD in biochem thus your points are moot and not worth my time to discuss further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest begaster Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Simmer down and show some respect. You don't have to agree with him, but you can still remain polite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 See, I've never understood this line of reasoning. You posit that the universe is far too complex and intricate to have come about on its own. Therefore, a God is required to have made it. Yet, wouldn't a God able to create such a magnificently complex universe out of nothing be far more complex? Which just leads to the question of what created him, ad infinitum. And if you state that He has always been, then why could the universe not have just always been as well (if not ours, at least the energy and matter that it's composed of)? Well, this is where it comes again down to a matter or philosophical preference. Was the universe and all of its energy put into existence, or does it simply exist on its own? There is absolutely no way to debate the correct answer to this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Simmer down and show some respect. You don't have to agree with him, but you can still remain polite. lol, begaster - vip was inside joking with avenir. don't worry. ps avenir is a girl edited: posted vippys' real name hahaa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 In the spirit of an old friend: no they shouldn't, and the fact that you just said that means you're not a scientist because i use superior logic and reasoning skills I'm sorry but you seem to not understand basic ideas, which makes me question whether you're a scientist again. does it? ...it doesn't btw No, after we're done figuring out everything, and trust me, we will very soon, scientists (aka moi) will spend the rest of our time disproving stupid ppl that don't believe us (aka you) do they? ...they don't btw what about the weasel, they're pretty crafty? eh? why do you think we use the term 'weasel out of things'? eh? I find it funny how wrong you are. I'm sorry, but you're simply WRONG. Now your whatever-degree is no match for my PhD in biochem thus your points are moot and not worth my time to discuss further. Hey everyone, This guy is joking right? If not, I don't respect his attitude towards Avenir. Edit: If he wasn't joking, he should get a PhD in R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orchid Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 damn... watch out ! he has a PhD !!!! no degree can match that! hey LUXMAN you've got competition... maybe he's preparing for MCAT too? (hopefully the regular posters will get this one) hahha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest begaster Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Well, this is where it comes again down to a matter or philosophical preference. Was the universe and all of its energy put into existence, or does it simply exist on its own? There is absolutely no way to debate the correct answer to this issue. But it's not merely philosophical preference. It's also statistical preference. What I mean is, if you're arguing purely on complexity, the more complex something is, the less likely it is to just pop into existence. Statistically, you're more likely to blow up a building with all the necessary ingredients and create a baseball bat rather than a functioning 747. Likewise, a God that could create such a complex universe must be infinitely more complex than our universe. If I had to guess which is less likely to randomly come into existence without any trigger, it would be Him. And my bad about vip. I'm not part of your cool group clique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 In the spirit of an old friend: no they shouldn't, and the fact that you just said that means you're not a scientist because i use superior logic and reasoning skills I'm sorry but you seem to not understand basic ideas, which makes me question whether you're a scientist again. does it? ...it doesn't btw No, after we're done figuring out everything, and trust me, we will very soon, scientists (aka moi) will spend the rest of our time disproving stupid ppl that don't believe us (aka you) do they? ...they don't btw what about the weasel, they're pretty crafty? eh? why do you think we use the term 'weasel out of things'? eh? I find it funny how wrong you are. I'm sorry, but you're simply WRONG. Now your whatever-degree is no match for my PhD in biochem thus your points are moot and not worth my time to discuss further. AHAHAHAHAAHHAHA!!!! WIN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.