Jump to content
Science Forums

Cerebratoligy


H0kag3
 Share

Recommended Posts

Was browsing internet the other day and came across a web page for a religion called Cerebratoligy. It appears to be a new religion that values science and independent thought. Has anyone heard of this, and what is your opinion? Their home page is http://www.churchofcerebratoligy.org They also have a facebook page.

Edited by H0kag3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to hypography, H0kag3! :) Please feel free to start a topic in the introductions forum to tell us something about yourself.

 

Was browsing internet the other day and came across a web page for a religion called Cerebratoligy. It appears to be a new religion that values science and independent thought. Has anyone heard of this, and what is your opinion? Their home page is http://www.cerebratoligy.org

That URL appears not to exist, not to have existed long enough to be archived at archive.org.

 

www.churchofcerebratoligy.org seems to be what you are talking about. There doesn’t seem to be much there, though it has a nice embedding of the Symphony of Science musical project’s “We are Stardust”.

 

Though I’ve never heard of Cerebratoligy, I’ve encountered similar ideas in may people and small groups of people. It’s seems to me a strange name, as I’ve never seen the affix “-oligy”. It seems something of a fusion of “-ology”, meaning “the study of”, and “oligo-” meaning “few or little”, though this doesn’t make much sense.

 

Have you had any experience with Cerebratoligy, H0kag3?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I haven't had any experience with Cerebratoligy. The idea of a religion that actually says they believe in science and encourage people to think for themselves, seems to go against everything that any religion I have ever heard of Preaches. I found the concept interesting and was hoping that maybe someone had heard of Cerebratoligy or knew anytghing about it.

 

What you said about "oligy" being a combination of "ology" and "oligo" makes sence. Maybe they Combined the two because there doesnt seem to be many people, at least to my knowlege, that are trying to find a link between Science and Religion, instead of one trying to prove the other wrong.

 

For example, Science teaches Evolution and Religion teaches Creationism. What if both are true? What if Angels are actually Aliens? Etc.

 

I personaly believe that anything that is in the Bible could be explained by science. I think it's just a matter of interpretaion.

 

From what I found, The Church of Cerebratoligy, is fairly knew and doesn't seem to have many followers yet.

 

Seems like they may be onto something though. Personally, I have always been turned off by Religion because they expect you to believe blindly, without question. It's refreshing to see a religion that doesn't seem to deal in absolutes. I think it deserves looking into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I haven't had any experience with Cerebratoligy. The idea of a religion that actually says they believe in science and encourage people to think for themselves, seems to go against everything that any religion I have ever heard of Preaches.

I see this claim made so often that I am beginning to doubt my own experiences. I was raised within the Church of Scotland, in an island community. This was a time and place when Sunday was a day of rest: running and playing boisterously was a no-no, shops were all closed.

 

My response to the church and its teaching led family and friends to anticipate that I would join the ministry. At no time did I sense any conflict between what I learned at church and what I learned in science class. Nor did I feel in any way that my thought patterns were being regimented. On the contrary I was encouraged by all to think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see this claim made so often that I am beginning to doubt my own experiences. I was raised within the Church of Scotland, in an island community. This was a time and place when Sunday was a day of rest: running and playing boisterously was a no-no, shops were all closed.

 

My response to the church and its teaching led family and friends to anticipate that I would join the ministry. At no time did I sense any conflict between what I learned at church and what I learned in science class. Nor did I feel in any way that my thought patterns were being regimented. On the contrary I was encouraged by all to think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reply to Eclogites post:

 

I think that your experience is quite quite unique in regards to having their church encourage them to think for yourself.

 

My younger brother was asked to no longer attend our local churches youth ministry, by the youth pastor, because he questioned what they were teaching, and others began question ing also.

Edited by H0kag3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see this claim made so often that I am beginning to doubt my own experiences. I was raised within the Church of Scotland, in an island community. This was a time and place when Sunday was a day of rest: running and playing boisterously was a no-no, shops were all closed.

 

My response to the church and its teaching led family and friends to anticipate that I would join the ministry. At no time did I sense any conflict between what I learned at church and what I learned in science class. Nor did I feel in any way that my thought patterns were being regimented. On the contrary I was encouraged by all to think.

 

 

You are the only person who I have ever seen make this claim, did your church not teach the story of Noah's Ark or Jonah and the whale? Or the story of Genesis? I might not have been so inclined to dismiss religion as horse feathers if this attitude had been promoted in the churches I have attended in my life, it would be interesting to hear how the conflicts between reality and dogma were explained in your church...

 

One thing to consider, since the web site being promoted is asking for donations i still think this is spam...

Edited by Moontanman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea of a religion that actually says they believe in science and encourage people to think for themselves, seems to go against everything that any religion I have ever heard of Preaches.

I see this claim made so often that I am beginning to doubt my own experiences. I was raised within the Church of Scotland, in an island community.

...

At no time did I sense any conflict between what I learned at church and what I learned in science class.

Gould’s 1997 essay Nonoverlapping Magisteria makes the point that the position of Roman Catholic church is explicitly compatible with free thought and other scientific ideals. I’ve found agreement with this idea among adherents of other Christian denominations, other major religions, non-traditionally religious mystics.

 

My experience is that rejection of science is more related to local culture and education than religiousness. Clergy with science PhDs rarely believe their religious beliefs to conflict with science, while only casually religious people with little education or social exposure to people with much education often do.

 

From what I have learned, about Cerebratoligy, they seem very open to the possibility of such things, existing. They have a forum on their website, where they invite individuals to share their beliefs and ideas. Http://WWW.CHURCHOFCEREBRATOLIGY.ORG

This forum only has 1 post, though, and not one I find encouraging:

Do Angels and/or Aliiens exist? Could they be one and the same?

 

Personally, I think its quite possible that both do exist and are most likey one and the same. What are your thoughts on this?

IMHO, the belief that angelic extraterrestrial visitor likely exist is a dogmatic, though not a conventionally religious, one, more common in pseudoscience than science.

 

relegion

notice: 2 hyperlinks

The origin of the English word religion is not “re-“, meaning “again” and “legion” meaning “many”.

 

There are 2 main etymological theories on its religion: “re-“ and “legere”, meaning “read”; and “re-“ + “ligare”, meaning “to bind firmly” – more liberally, “people of the Book” or “bound together”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It certainly feels like religion's trend is toward embracing science, or at least embracing Gould's non-overlapping magisteria. It's an encouraging step in the right direction, but I'd be weary of any new religion.

 

Sam Harris has recommended Buddhism for people wanting to experience the transcendent without the non-metaphysical claims of the traditional monotheisms. But, if someone is looking for the community and social aspects provided by religion Buddhism might not be as good as... say... Unitarianism. Unitarians are known for their liberal attitude toward rational thought and science, and their rejection of the more orthodox Protestant doctrines.

 

~modest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...