ipl-logo

Poin Bill Nye Analysis

1082 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Influence of religion in science

One of the most common trends circulating in many religious communities is the spread of misinformation about the scientific literature by religious organizations. This trend has caused the religious community to harbor enmity against the scientific literature and their community. To resolve the misunderstanding both religious and scientific communities have gathered together to communicate their views on beliefs, morality, the beginning of the universe, how all life was created, Holy Scriptures, and the scientific literature. Debates are a common practice used to establish a dialog between two opposing viewpoints. Each side is represented by an individual of popularity or credential. Some of the more noticeable individuals are authors of well-known books who rationalize or attempt to rationalize a specific viewpoint of the topic. Under specified rules and time limit each side is given a chance to present their views to the audience arguing for or against the chosen topic. Some debates use a …show more content…

Though some religious scientist may not believe in the Bible literally this doesn’t imply they can’t view it symbolically or metaphorically, which I think is a more common perspective of many nondenominational or spiritualists. I think in a sense this helps the religious community to actually question the intention of their holy book creating a much deeper and significant understanding of what the stories might have been emphasizing. Plus, I think it’s this kind of mentality that will open up the religious community to accepting theological scholarly literature which break down the holy literature and unravel the puzzles behind it history, intention, and interpretation completely untouched by irrational misinterpret which has kept many denominations and nondenominational divided by what is to be taken literal or

Show More
Related
767 Words | 4 Pages

While the science versus faith argument has existed for centuries, only rarely do they ever work hand in hand. Richard Selzer, author of The Surgeon as Priest, breaks the barrier and explores the contrast between the two ideas, likening them, while breaking his piece into five distinct parts to help himself and the reader analyze it. Selzer uses process analysis, transition between first, second, and third person perspective, a plethora of literary techniques, as well as evocative syntax and diction to explore the conflict between religious anomalies and scientific conviction to propose his purpose, discussing in an almost interrogative fashion - when does zeal become iniquity? To start off his essay, Selzer begins talking directly to the

Read More
253 Words | 2 Pages

In his letter answering sixth-grade student Phyllis Wright’s question of whether scientists pray, Albert Einstein employs purposeful logos and diction to successfully distinguish the religiosity of true scientists from that others. Einstein logically builds his distinction by asserting that “a research scientist will hardly believe ... [in] prayer” and subsequently revealing that experienced scientists nevertheless develop a religious devotion towards “a spirit vastly superior to that of man.” This explicit presentation of the similarities and differences makes it clear how the scientists’ concepts of piety differ from conventional beliefs. Henceforth, Wright would conceptualize Einstein’s beliefs as a variation from the beliefs she is familiar

Read More
971 Words | 4 Pages

However, in order to progress it is important to consider these and other questions. Just accepting things for the way they are both restricts and frees the mind. Conversely, to search for answers and believing them wholeheartedly is dangerous. With the rejection of religion, people have turned to science. This conversation appears to be good in many ways, however, the science has simply created another belief system - one just as intolerant.

Read More
829 Words | 4 Pages

Dr. Mortenson taught his audience on the subject of how the idea that the earth is billions of years old became such an accepted belief, and is almost unquestioned by the current generation. Using Processional organization, he presented his speech through the years of different atheists and deists such as Jean Lamarck, and Pierre Laplace, as well as through the eyes of “liberal theologians” such as Thomas Chalmers, and George Stanley. Dr. Mortenson showed his audience through means of informative speech, how we should understand that the prevailing belief the world is billions of years old, did not happen overnight. Through his approach to the audience, his organizational process, and his informative strategy, Dr. Mortenson could effectively or inefficiently captivate and inform his audience or confuse them further on the subject. Dr. Mortenson kept eye contact with his audience almost the entire time he spoke, only looking down briefly to read notes.

Read More
691 Words | 3 Pages

Thus, certain arguments needed to be disputed to come to our final conclusion. For religion, as gifts of God, humans should not disrespect these gifts and show proper

Read More
396 Words | 2 Pages

He discussed Douglas Park’s definition of audience that includes those who hear or read a discourse, those who are a part of an external rhetorical situation, those who the writer thinks of, and the audience suggested by the discourse. Grant-Davie says that reading and writing can be a negotiation between the readers and writers. Constraints as factors in a situation that can affect the achievement of the rhetorical objectives. Grant-Davie defined constraints as all factors in a situation aside from the rhetor and audience that can lead the audience to consider the discourse differently and influence the rhetors response. He also said that a rhetorical situation ends when the discourse has been

Read More
1078 Words | 5 Pages

The authors wrote about the significant part of the story and the most theologically significant. Plus, if you looked at the text in a scientific way it could vary a lot from person to person based on their scientific sophistication. I agree that we cannot look at part of the bible in a scientific way. For example, the author tells the story about how Adam was taken half of, in order to create Eve.

Read More
671 Words | 3 Pages

How successfully do you think your team performed during the debate? What sort of problems did you encounter and how could you avoid these in the future? Though a little bit nervous we successfully based our answers on our definitions, most time we followed our logical structure that “science arouses doubts then doubts lead to the demise of the religion”. However, sometimes we tended to follow the other group’s logic and fail to point out the unrelated questions at the first time but tried to answer them.

Read More
769 Words | 4 Pages

This approach supports the discovery of religious truths through rational argument, proofs, and reason, and often concerned with two

Read More
613 Words | 3 Pages

In 1936, Phyllis Wright, a sixth-grader that hoped to understand what scientist prayed about, sent a letter to Albert Einstein, who responded to her inquiry with a well-thought-out letter. Within the reply, Einstein used appeals to logos, ethos, and pathos; clever manipulation of the relationship between subject, speaker, and audience; and a well-articulated purpose, all of which made Einstein’s reply rhetorically effective. Perhaps the most important observation that can be made about rhetoric in Einstein’s response is the clear imbalance of the rhetorical triangle, which describes the relationship between subject, audience, and speaker. The subject addressed within Einstein’s letter was prayer and how scientists use it, and this subject clearly

Read More
1587 Words | 7 Pages

Even though we are all religious in our own ways, I would like to discuss today why science alone can’t keep us going. That religion affects us more than we realize, and that it is more powerful than science. However,

Read More
1448 Words | 6 Pages

In the 18th and 19th centuries the conflict begins with some scientific observations of natural history. But the term “creationism” becomes to be used only in the late 19th. The arriving of science in the all-day life changes the point of view from some creationists, the material founded proved that Earth is billions years old and some proclaim themselves as “Gap

Read More
1009 Words | 5 Pages

Does religion contradict science? In this world filled with scientific discoveries and Christian views, there is always a tension with fundamental Christians who completely reject science and hold on to Bible as facts. In this paper I am going to explore the statement “Science and the bible contradict each other, Christians must believe in the Bible and reject science” and come to a conclusion accordingly.

Read More
1116 Words | 5 Pages

In a survey of 275 faculty members from 21 different research universities in the United States, 15% believed Science and Religion were always in conflict, 15% said the two were never in conflict, and 70% said they are sometimes in conflict. The survey concluded that the scientist who believed Science and Religion were always in conflict is simply because they have a narrow view on Religion, the identity it with conservative strains of American Evangelical Christianity. The majority of people who said science and religion are never on conflict is because God created science and they both have completely different views of viewing reality. They also found in the study scientists who are very spiritual and religious are less likely to see religion and science as a conflict. This proves the two can co-exist because scientist view on the subject is adamtely explained to the point where hundred of scientists reach out to share their political views with the survey.

Read More
943 Words | 4 Pages

Nicalea Greenlee Astronomy, 7 December 15, 2017 Science vs. Religion Science and religion has always been an argument for years. I think science and religion are both very important to the way of life and how we see the entire universe. But I believe religion is more believable than science. For science can be proven wrong at any given time and religion can never be stated untrue. Such as the story of creation, evolution, practices and beliefs can contradict these theories.

Read More

More about Poin Bill Nye Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document