Originally posted by IvanhoeBack around the time of Ronald Reagan's death the local Christian radio station host was contrasting what he considered the faux Christianity of John Kerry with the strong faith of President and Mrs. Reagan. I have heard that Nancy Reagan is in favor of government funding of embryonic stem cell research.
... Faith offers us wisdom.
Now it is interesting that the local station runs James Dobson's "Focus on the Family" program, and Mr. Dobson is outspokenly against embryonic stem cell research on moral grounds. In fact, I heard Dobson compare such research to Nazi research at Dachau prison camp.
Can two such opposing points of view as Nancy Reagan's and James Dobson's both be consistent with faith endowing wisdom upon the believer, as Ivanhoe seems to be implying?
Originally posted by Paul DiracI guess you should contrast that to how unified scientists are on all subjects. And what about atheists. They all agree, right?
Back around the time of Ronald Reagan's death the local Christian radio station host was contrasting what he considered the faux Christianity of John Kerry with the strong faith of President and Mrs. Reagan. I have heard that Nancy Reag ...[text shortened]... ndowing wisdom upon the believer, as Ivanhoe seems to be implying?
Originally posted by ColettiThat seems right to me too. There is a normative connotation to the term 'wisdom' such that, minimally, the wise person is more apt to act morally. My grandfather, who worked on the Manhattan project as a physicist and engineer, claimed that an intelligent man may know how a nuclear reactor works, but a wise man knows how a nuclear reactor ought to be used.
I was just wondering that myself. Off the cuff, I'd say wisdom is the capacity for the just application of knowledge (deductive) and experience (inductive) to a given situation.
Originally posted by bbarrWould you say that there's a strong correlation, + or -, between intelligence and wisdom as defined by your grandfather?
That seems right to me too. There is a normative connotation to the term 'wisdom' such that, minimally, the wise person is more apt to act morally. My grandfather, who worked on the Manhattan project as a physicist and engineer, claimed that an intelligent man may know how a nuclear reactor works, but a wise man knows how a nuclear reactor ought to be used.
(I have in mind the fact that pyromania is de rigeur for virtually all of the intelligent peopl on whom I have data.)
Originally posted by royalchicken
Would you say that there's a strong correlation, + or -, between intelligence and wisdom as defined by [bbarr's] grandfather?
I like the two off-the-cuff statements too. The difference between knowledge and wisdom is definitely an is vs. ought kind of difference. Science is, and must be, concerned with is. Ethics is concerned with ought.
On royalchicken's question, I would say that there is a strong correlation, but it is one-way. To be wise, it is necessary to be intelligent, but intelligence is definitely not sufficient for wisdom.
(I have in mind the fact that pyromania is de rigeur for virtually all of the intelligent peopl on whom I have data.)
I have speculated on this too. 🙂 A relatively large proportion (but by no means all) of my highly intelligent friends exhibit quite a bit of attraction to explosives (in many cases, specifically tightly constrained, controlled and directed explosives). However, I wonder if this is merely to be expected as a rather large proportion of the general population seems to exhibit a similar attraction. In my own case, I am perfectly happy to use fire for practical purposes. I am happy to watch celebratory fireworks displays. And on occasion I have even used some of those tightly constrained, controlled and directed explosions. However, I have never seemed to feel quite the same emotional attraction to or satisfaction with things that go "bang" as to sharp things, for example. Whether this is related to either "intelligence" or "wisdom" is hard to say. Although, of course, I would like to think it is. 😉
Paul
Originally posted by ivanhoeAre these "points" sharp enough to cause pain in a being that created "pain" and indeed the universe?
Science has so many points against God, like the Big Bang, and evolution of Man .......
We can often hear statements like the one quoted above, essentially stating that science and faith are at odds with eachother.
The Big Bang theory and the theory of Evolution is often seen by secular people as some sort of proof that God doesn't exist. Very of ...[text shortened]... look upon faith ? What functions do they have and will science eventually replace faith ?
Why worry about that which is not knowable?
You are torturing yourself for nothing.
Evangelical zeal is only a squeel heard by the ungreased wheel of fools needing to deal with what is real.
Does god care? If so why in the hell worship a silly little midget god?