Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the end, science is no more compatible with religion than with other superstitions, such as leprechauns. Yet we don't talk about reconciling science with leprechauns. We worry about religion simply because it's the most venerable superstition — and the most politically and financially powerful.
Science and religion are completely compatible. I realize it takes some depth of both faith and knowledge to understand the known and unknown, but they truly are quite compatible. Think about the Yin/Yang philosophy for a moment. Do you think that was only about good/evil?
I am trained as a scientist.
I believe in god.
I despise organized religion.
I agree.
I am also trained in science.
I have no opinion on God, but I have no reason to tell anyone their opinion about god isn't right. That is not what science should do, IMO. Nor do I think that religion should ignore science.
I also tend to be in disagreement with organized religion whether it be christianity, islam, catholicism, or any of the in your face - I'm right, you're wrong - beliefs.
There may very well be a God or some sort of superior being but I sure don't think it will be anything like the Bible says. We think that God created life on Earth. If that is the only criteria for being a God, then God could be aliens from another world that seeded Earth. As for the Bible itself, well for all we know it could have been written from somebody with a mind like Stephen King for the sole purpose of striking fear into those who otherwise live unethical lifestyles.
On the other hand, you don't need faith for science. This is something that can be proved.
I am a scientist in the way I think and approach life, but there are areas outside of science that I think are equally important. I think the two can coexist. For example a lot of what we call "spirituality" I think is just science we haven't figured out yet. For example, what M-theory proposes and what many spiritual people describe as "God" seem awfully close to me. But just because we haven't figured out the why doesn't mean we have to doubt anything that isn't directly obvious to the naked eye. A lot of scientists blow off things they just don't see as being part of the physical universe. But instead, we should just be setting up experiments left and right to see if we can figure out an explanation within physical science.
I don't think it makes sense to try to bend science to a religious belief, though. For example, claiming evolution occurred in 6,000 years because each "day" in the Bible was equal to about a thousand years. The fact that organized religions encourages respecting authority and leaves it up to an authority to say what's real and what's not, and the fact that science relies on experimentation and direct observation can make the two harder to reconcile. Science is all about change. Religion is all about preservation. The two are hard to reconcile in that sense, but other than that, the two can definitely coexist.
I also believe some "scientists" make their views into a religion. The kind of people that "believe" in Evolution but can't explain how it works and how it would give us what we have today.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
