science and religion (agnostic, quotes, virtual, body)
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.
I was not criticizing science. I was not saying there should be no science. Jeez.
I was responding to those here who consider science an all-powerful unlimited source of truth. The things it has not answered they expect it to answer pretty soon. That is faith. It is worship of the human mind.
Science is not new. People have been using logic and trial and error to figure out the causes of things since our species began, and some animals before that. But newer science builds on older science, so now it is much more advanced.
Again, I have not complained about science. I am saying it is not something new, and it does not replace all other ways of experiencing, and it does not and will not provide all answers.
I've never heard a scientist use the term "all-knowing" about science. That term seems to be reserved for...oops...christians about the god they can't understand.
I was not criticizing science. I was not saying there should be no science. Jeez.
I was responding to those here who consider science an all-powerful unlimited source of truth. The things it has not answered they expect it to answer pretty soon. That is faith. It is worship of the human mind.
Science is not new. People have been using logic and trial and error to figure out the causes of things since our species began, and some animals before that. But newer science builds on older science, so now it is much more advanced.
Again, I have not complained about science. I am saying it is not something new, and it does not replace all other ways of experiencing, and it does not and will not provide all answers.
I was not criticizing science. I was not saying there should be no science. Jeez.
I was responding to those here who consider science an all-powerful unlimited source of truth. The things it has not answered they expect it to answer pretty soon. That is faith. It is worship of the human mind.
Science is not new. People have been using logic and trial and error to figure out the causes of things since our species began, and some animals before that. But newer science builds on older science, so now it is much more advanced.
Again, I have not complained about science. I am saying it is not something new, and it does not replace all other ways of experiencing, and it does not and will not provide all answers.
Who are those "who consider science an all-powerful unlimited source of truth?" You're the only one I have heard use the phrase "all-powerful unlimited source of truth." (Well, other than some Christians referring to God and/or the Bible.)
Perhaps Good4Nothin can provide the names of some...any...scientists or even any lay people who have ever stated that science does or might any time soon, have all the answers
"I worship science."
"Science will easily answer all the big questions."
"Nothing can possibly be true unless science has already discovered it."
"Science is an all-powerful unlimited source of truth."
"Science will provide all the answers."
"We will soon understand everything."
"How dare you question my results."
"We don't know anything until we know everything."
"The universe/human body/human mind/human diseases (pick one or all) are simple, readily understood, and easily fixable."
.......... said no scientist I've ever met
Last edited by HeelaMonster; 10-31-2018 at 02:27 PM..
And it could be true. Probably more going for it than Biblegod which has logical and evidential reasons to doubt that it really exists.
But it still seems to me that it relies on Faith -claims based on filling in unknowns or at least undisprovens combined with common human beliefs which might be true (soul) or might be a human instinctive superstition. Until a soul, a cosmic consciousness or any other thing that has no valid evidence (or we'd have heard of it) is put on a compelling evidential basis, credibility must be withheld, and at best it can only be put with the other religious or quasi - religious faith - claims. Of which there are more than you can shake a stick at
"I worship science."
"Science will easily answer all the big questions."
"Nothing can possibly be true unless science has already discovered it."
"Science is an all-powerful unlimited source of truth."
"Science will provide all the answers."
"We will soon understand everything."
"How dare you question my results."
"We don't know anything until we know everything."
"The universe/human body/human mind/human diseases (pick one or all) are simple, readily understood, and easily fixable."
.......... said no scientist I've ever met
A fine collation of all the strawman misrepresentations that those who seem to think that whatever Faith -based Theory they espouse without a shred of decent evidence will somehow become more credible if they can discredit science, are prone to using. Again and again and again.
I've never heard a scientist use the term "all-knowing" about science. That term seems to be reserved for...oops...christians about the god they can't understand.
They don't say science is "all-knowing." They say it is "self-correcting." And they say there is nothing preventing from answering all questions eventually.
So same difference, different words.
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.
