4 ms·

"... as more of the world is explained — and ends up being not so divine after all ..." I don't understand this sweeping statement by the author (who seems bet

"... as more of the world is explained — and ends up being not so divine after all ..." I don't understand this sweeping statement by the author (who seems between the lines to be struggling with her own issues of faith and belief, and hence had to write a book about how gullible humans are). Is she saying that something, once explained, can no longer be divine?

eric_h 11y ago
That does seem to be the implication. Personally, however, I disagree. I'm an atheist, and I still find wonder in the things that science explains, and I've always assumed that that feeling of wonder is along the lines of what religious people feel. I'm also certain that I could (and have successfully) argue the point that religion and divinity and a relationship with god are in no way affected by scientific knowledge, regardless of what some fraction of very religious folks would have you think (I do not mean that I could argue successfully with that particular fraction - just those who are on the fence on the matter).
- Retra 11y ago
  Wonder and divinity are not the same things.
qmalzp 11y ago
People used to believe lightning was what happened when the gods became angry. Now we know the source of lightning is an electrostatic discharge.
gnoway 11y ago
I think you're putting words in her mouth, so to speak. That paragraph begins by repeating a statement about God being found in the cracks between knowledge. I know I've read this elsewhere, it's not a new idea. The rest of the paragraph just restates this in a way that I think is very fair. My direct answer: yes. IMO divinity is just magic backing a particular narrative. As we discover and accept alternative explanations for why things are the way they are, that magic disappears and the narrative loses power.
- mjklin 11y ago
  > God being found in the cracks between knowledge See here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps
aaronem 11y ago
Yes, unless the explanation is that God directly caused whatever event happens to be the subject of discussion. That's what "divine" means. Which is, of course, not to say that said event cannot be wondrous, or awesome, or terrible. Just that it can no longer accurately be considered divine.

eric_h 11y ago

That does seem to be the implication. Personally, however, I disagree. I'm an atheist, and I still find wonder in the things that science explains, and I've always assumed that that feeling of wonder is along the lines of what religious people feel. I'm also certain that I could (and have successfully) argue the point that religion and divinity and a relationship with god are in no way affected by scientific knowledge, regardless of what some fraction of very religious folks would have you think (I do not mean that I could argue successfully with that particular fraction - just those who are on the fence on the matter).

Retra 11y ago
Wonder and divinity are not the same things.

qmalzp 11y ago

People used to believe lightning was what happened when the gods became angry. Now we know the source of lightning is an electrostatic discharge.

gnoway 11y ago

I think you're putting words in her mouth, so to speak. That paragraph begins by repeating a statement about God being found in the cracks between knowledge. I know I've read this elsewhere, it's not a new idea. The rest of the paragraph just restates this in a way that I think is very fair. My direct answer: yes. IMO divinity is just magic backing a particular narrative. As we discover and accept alternative explanations for why things are the way they are, that magic disappears and the narrative loses power.

mjklin 11y ago
> God being found in the cracks between knowledge See here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps

aaronem 11y ago

Yes, unless the explanation is that God directly caused whatever event happens to be the subject of discussion. That's what "divine" means. Which is, of course, not to say that said event cannot be wondrous, or awesome, or terrible. Just that it can no longer accurately be considered divine.