God's Evolving/Split Personality??

Alright, well I wouldn't exactly call it a misquote but definitely a misunderstanding of what you meant. I would agree that science is neutral and when it comes to moral implications of discoveries, it is not required of it to pass opinions. But my question is, does it need to? I would much rather consider ethics over morality any day when it comes to science. Meaning, it might be inhumane to do tests on human subjects, however; I also feel that if a person gave consent for any and all types of tests, then by all means it would not be immoral to do testing on them. I know nothing is ever that clean cut and there are ways to abuse such a situation, but it was necessary to state my point.

Doing genetic testing using mice might be inhumane to mice especially if it's to grow a human ear on it's back. If I were that mouse, I might not appreciate my back having a human ear attached to it but if I knew it might benefit some human, I might reconsider. People are quick to demonize one side while not checking in with the other sides point of view.

I have often considered a plausible scenario for myself. If I could sell myself to science, in the sense that let's say I am given anything everything I want for five years and at the end of those five years I offer my body over to any and every type of testing, even those which would constitute unethical. Would I be willing to do such a thing? I still haven't been able to answer it, because I am not sure I could justify it completely. Perhaps I am being to generous to the idea, that someone would even consider offering me anything and everything I wanted for five years?

I do know one thing though, if I had a soul, I would sell it to feed the homeless.

I would if I had the time, but Ive got alot of studying to do. Science does deal with morals, values, and purpose. Just look at evolution. I dont have the time to go into precise detail and list sources so heres a neat video on the subject that you might find interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BThmL-Td-IE

[quote=prothero]You mean am I certain or can I prove my position to others? No, and I did not claim I could; but neither can it be proven that the universe has no purpose, and the notion that the universe is lawful and ordered is somewhat central to the notion of science.. I could be wrong and I freely admit it, I do not find the notion that the universe is blind pitiless indifference to be illogical or unscientific (of course it's not scientific either) but just sort of personally (for me) distasteful and uninspiring.
I like Robert Langdon's "Faith is a gift I have yet to receive" or
Soren Kierkegaard's "The leap of faith" or
Woody Allen's "If I have to choose between truth and god, I will choose god, and have a better life for it".[/quote]

As long as you are aware that you could be wrong is fine with me. Thats all I was wondering, if you ask yourself if what you are attributing could be wrong.

[quote=prothero]We all make assumptions (metaphysical and philosophical assumptions) which cannot be proven using the scientific method and use them as a guide to living. We all construct a worldview which is more comprehensive than what sense experience or science tells us. The trick is that that worldview should not directly conflict with experience or science not that it must be confirmed by it.
Do you have free will? Can you prove it" one way or the other
Does the universe have a purpose?
Where do morals come from?
Is there a god?
Do I love my wife?
Are Bach and Mozart great composers?
Is there life after death?
Are roses beautiful?
God and faith are not scientific questions and science neither confirms them nor disproves them. These are not matters of intellect, education or reason., I respect your position, I just choose not to adopt it. The real question here is do you respect mine? My conception of god is neither supernatural nor anthropomorphic.[/quote]

I respect your opinion if you are intellectually honest about your position, and it seems like you are. You may not be able to 'prove' purpose and/or 'order' in the universe as of right now, but that's not what I was getting at. My intention was that if you do want confirmation about your hypothesis (and it seems like you do) then the method you would use to find this out would be the scientific method. This isnt a priori knowledge; its an empirical one. So all Im trying to get you to see is that science is your friend. Science doesnt have a hidden agenda and it doesnt care about what the answers mean. All science is, is a way test something with as little amount of bias and contamination as possible -- and there's nothing anyone can say that is wrong with that. So if you were going to try and 'prove' purpose or 'order' you would use the scientific method.

Basically, the old testament was written by the Jewish Tribes, to balance order amongst their people, so they created a God that struck fear into people, in order to prevent them from doign things wrong. In the new testament, it was written by the new Christians, hoping to spread their religion, and get people to join their cause, thus a nicer, kinder, gentler, more peaceful and civil God was needed. That's what i was raised to belief anyway.