Post by Danielle Sawyer on Aug 28, 2015 6:03:22 GMT
Socrates was accused and sentenced to death because he was believed to be “acting wickedly, and is criminally curious in searching into things under the earth, and in the heavens, and in making the worse appear the better cause and in teaching these same things to others.” To me Socrates wasn’t sentenced to death because what he was doing was strange but because it was unfamiliar to the people. Socrates seems to question everything and doesn’t take a simple answer, he wants the facts and he’ll ask questions upon questions until he gets it. Like in the first part of the book “How Socrates Died,” he was talking with his friend Euthyphro a lawyer, and they came across the words piety and impiety. So Socrates then began questioning Euthyphro in kind of circular motion, like asking him if these words can mean this how they could also mean something completely different. Socrates’ curiosity got him sentenced to death. It was unfamiliar to the people of the city which made people uncomfortable when the youth started picking up what Socrates was learning and finding out.
There are conflicts between science and religion because according to the book “The Great Mystery: Matter vs Spirit,” they say “matter itself was and is as mysterious and as glorious as anything conjured up in our spiritual imaginations.” The definitions in science are constantly getting thrown around and redefined. Scientists are the opposite of religionists because they are continually trying to discover and test/prove the theories. While in religion the meanings of words and of actions are persistent, they believe what they have learned and don’t question it. They have a mindset that if that’s how things were that’s how things should be. With an adapting world everything changes and if religion doesn’t adapt to the world they are living in now it’s going to repeatedly collide with science. The argument of why science and religion collide is because they will never see eye to eye. You can’t mix a new philosophy with an old one and get the same results, one or the other or both is going to have to find the equilibrium of the middle if they ever want to agree with each other.
There are conflicts between science and religion because according to the book “The Great Mystery: Matter vs Spirit,” they say “matter itself was and is as mysterious and as glorious as anything conjured up in our spiritual imaginations.” The definitions in science are constantly getting thrown around and redefined. Scientists are the opposite of religionists because they are continually trying to discover and test/prove the theories. While in religion the meanings of words and of actions are persistent, they believe what they have learned and don’t question it. They have a mindset that if that’s how things were that’s how things should be. With an adapting world everything changes and if religion doesn’t adapt to the world they are living in now it’s going to repeatedly collide with science. The argument of why science and religion collide is because they will never see eye to eye. You can’t mix a new philosophy with an old one and get the same results, one or the other or both is going to have to find the equilibrium of the middle if they ever want to agree with each other.
