Seeds of knowledge

[HydrogenBond]

The debate between religion and science knowledge is due to a misunderstanding, which can compared to the contrast between a seed and a tree. As a way of example, picture if all the experts in semi-conductors came together to discuss the future of silcon memory. There are experts in quantum physics, chemistry, materials, math and computer programming. After the forum, the chairman is asked, by his first grade daughter, to give a lecture of the future to her little classmates.

 

Among the experts, the chairman can discuss the latest theories in great detail. But with these young bright students he is handtied. They have little education and very little background to go very deep. At the same time, if he tries to build a little background, he will lose their interest. They will begin to yawn, daydream, or take out the coloring book. To keep their interest and to help them gaining some understanding, he needs to come up with something that is fun and easy to understand.

 

So the chairman develops the analogy of the many possible modes oelectron jumping in a semi-conductor to a field of rabbit holes, where rabbits can pop in and out of their little holes. They can also run acoss the field into other holes. Or they can tunnel between holes. Technically semi-conductors are not rabbits in holes but the analogy gives them a very simple way to remember a very complex aspect of science. With this visual image they can be asked to draw pictures. They can even discuss the fundamental basis of futuriistic semi-conductors with their friends. The chairman gave them a very portable seed.

 

If you look at education, widespread education only goes back maybe 200 years and was primarily limited to males. Before that only the clergy and the wealthy had access to education. Go back to before the printing press and education was even more limited, since books were very scarce. Go back 5000 years and the average person had essentially the education of a pre-schooler, but the common sense of adults. They were smart with common sense but lacking in formal education. What they did have were plenty of mythological seeds that were handed done through the generations, until the time some of these seeds could be watered by education and the relationships of science, to become trees.

 

For example, look at the first paragraph in Genesis, written 6-7K years ago, for a pre-school audience, by the chairman called God. "the universe was formless and void ...., let there by light!. Isn't that the BB theory in a nutshell? Actually, the seed is more advanced since the BB theory doesn't yet know how to begin before the primordial atom. Newer versions of the origin of the universe stem from other dimensions or parallel universes. Doesn't that simply replace the realm of God, with potentials from other universes or other dimensions (not of this universe).

 

At one time the earth was considered the center of the universe. Now we know it revolves around the sun. Yet, doesn't special relativity talk of relative references. For example, even though we know the sun is the center, why do we still use the earth as the zero reference when we look at the rest of the universe through telescopes. Earth being the center of the universe is technically incorrect, yet it is still utilized as the zero reference becauseit is still the best practical center reference for humans to use when dealing with the universe. This was true in ancient and modern times, and was known long ago and preserved for the future.

 

The point I am making is much of ancient knowledge, such as in the bible, were mytholgical seeds given to the pre-schoolers of that day, to keep and maintain interest so it would be handed down to the future. As the conditions got right, these seeds were watered with knowledge and science to produce trees of its kind. Just like a acorn is not an oak tree, it nevertheless contains the oak tree in potentia. This analogy is the center of debate between religon and science, one side says the acorn is the oak tree and other says the oaks tree has branches and that little round thing is much too small to be an oak tree. Yet if one watered the acorn, it would someday become an oak tree.

 

The rabbits in the field moving between holes is not an accurate picture of a semi-conductor in action. When the 1st graders knowlege progesses so he can replace the rabbit with an electron wave function and the holes with empty orbital positions, all of a sudden this preschool mythology become a growing tree of sicence that describes reality. The water of science allows these seeds to grow into trees. It is important to protect the seeds but they alos need to given water to grow to fruition. The gap between religion and science is due to a drought.

[InfiniteNow]

I like the analogy HydrogenBond. It was a good post above. :) Too many preschoolers, however, truly think there are little rabbits running across the silicone, and when the postdoc tries to tell them they're wrong, they have a tantrum and start crying until you let them have their portable seed again.

 

Like I said, I like the analogy you've drawn. :singer:

 

 

At what point must the preschoolers of today be told a new story and given a new seed?

[phoenixbyrd]

The only problem I see here is ... imparting modern knowledge onto a primitive people is just stupid. The reason they developed these mythologies was not because there was some really super duper genius guy who discovered the big bang 5,000 years ago and had to find a cuddly way to tell a primitive culture, but because they did not know anything much about our universe or planet. They developed stories to try and explain what they couldn't explain.

 

5,000 years ago our race didn't have the technological means or educatation to figure out the big bang and how planets form, let alone our location in the solar system. We didn't even learn about the big bang until very recently ourselve's.

 

Cute anology, but ridiculously idiotic. Sorry to sound harsh, but next time... put abit more thought into it. Think for once.

[Lancaster]

For example, look at the first paragraph in Genesis, written 6-7K years ago, for a pre-school audience, by the chairman called God.

 

Even modern Christians acknowledge that the Bible wasn't actually written by God. The Big Guy didn't just sit down, grab his favorite pen, and write it. They believe that actual men were inspired to write it.

 

 

The point I am making is much of ancient knowledge, such as in the bible, were mytholgical seeds given to the pre-schoolers of that day, to keep and maintain interest so it would be handed down to the future. As the conditions got right, these seeds were watered with knowledge and science to produce trees of its kind. Just like a acorn is not an oak tree, it nevertheless contains the oak tree in potentia. This analogy is the center of debate between religon and science, one side says the acorn is the oak tree and other says the oaks tree has branches and that little round thing is much too small to be an oak tree. Yet if one watered the acorn, it would someday become an oak tree.

 

There's one big flaw here, you are assuming that there was a God to give this information to these people. Also, following your seed to tree analogy, are you saying that the information God gave us, the Genesis metaphor, inspired scientists thousands of years later to look for other explanations? If anything, Christianity and the Bible has only hindered the development of scientific process, whether by physically stopping scientists (Galileo) or just showing extreme ignorance and noncooperation (creationism).

 

To draw a better analogy, ancient gardeners planted a seed that grew into a very large tree that dominated the surrounding area. Later, other gardeners who called themselves "scientists" began planting smaller trees. Unfortunately, these smaller trees had a hard time growing because the Big Tree would suck all the water from the surrounding soil, and sometimes would grow over the smaller trees with it's roots. Eventually, though, the big tree realized that the smaller trees were becoming very strong and plentiful. The new trees started joining their roots together, sharing moisture and sunlight. It began to ignore them, turning to it's own thoughts. Occasionally, it would try to stretch its ancient roots over the new trees. Only now, they would push the roots of the ancient tree back. Eventually, they began to overcome the old tree. The withered roots of the old tree began to crack and break. The limbs of the tree began to fall off. Soon, the ancient tree realized that it had made a mistake. It had underestimated the new tree's strength. It had thought itself too powerful for them, but it was wrong. Slowly, it began to die.

 

 

Wow, that was a pretty good analogy. Digital high five?

[InfiniteNow]

But, there were squirrels and birds and bugs living in that ancient tree, their nests secure... so when they noticed the leaves dying and branches cracking, they started stealing fruit and nuts from the new trees planted by the scientists, trying to "glue" their own tree back together. Alas, it wasn't working, and in their fear they tried hard to kill the scientist trees by getting as many other squirrels and birds and bugs from the pasture to agree on the importance of saving the ancient tree...

 

:) :singer:

[Lancaster]

But, there were squirrels and birds and bugs living in that ancient tree, their nests secure... so when they noticed the leaves dying and branches cracking, they started stealing fruit and nuts from the new trees planted by the scientists, trying to "glue" their own tree back together. Alas, it wasn't working, and in their fear they tried hard to kill the scientist trees by getting as many other squirrels and birds and bugs from the pasture to agree on the importance of saving the ancient tree...

 

:) :singer:

 

Ha, even better. Way to draw that analogy reeeaaaallllyyyy far.

 

Now where's my high five?

[phoenixbyrd]

What's with all this tree and seeds anologies? Dealing with a religous mind is dealing with a closed mind. But sometime's, they will adapt new information as their own. The bible is a great example of this. The entire history of christianity (being the most dominant now) is the ultimate example of this.

 

Christianity didn't rise to the top because it was right. It rose to the top by law and by destroying what it couldn't convert. Ok, so I guess I see how the old tree anology would fit here.

[InfiniteNow]

If one were to let the old tree die, it would compost and become fertilizer for the new trees. Think about that one for a bit...

 

 

Talk about taking an analogy too far... :singer:

 

 

 

 

:)

[Lancaster]

What's with all this tree and seeds anologies? Dealing with a religous mind is dealing with a closed mind. But sometime's, they will adapt new information as their own. The bible is a great example of this. The entire history of christianity (being the most dominant now) is the ultimate example of this.

 

Christianity didn't rise to the top because it was right. It rose to the top by law and by destroying what it couldn't convert. Ok, so I guess I see how the old tree anology would fit here.

 

Exactly. The only reason that I picked a tree metaphor is the title. And it also fit uncannily to the situation. I mean, really, look at that analogy. Uncanny!

[InfiniteNow]

Exactly. The only reason that I picked a tree metaphor is the title. And it also fit uncannily to the situation. I mean, really, look at that analogy. Uncanny!

Actually, HB came up with it in the first post...

 

 

What they did have were plenty of mythological seeds that were handed done through the generations, until the time some of these seeds could be watered by education and the relationships of science, to become trees. ...

 

...

As the conditions got right, these seeds were watered with knowledge and science to produce trees of its kind. Just like a acorn is not an oak tree, it nevertheless contains the oak tree in potentia. This analogy is the center of debate between religon and science, one side says the acorn is the oak tree and other says the oaks tree has branches and that little round thing is much too small to be an oak tree. Yet if one watered the acorn, it would someday become an oak tree.

[Lancaster]

Actually, HB came up with it in the first post...

 

Trees, seeds, whatever.