Lets not make everything more complicated than it already is shall we?
Science is Science. Religion is a religion. there is not a single similarity between the two of them.
Science is prone to changes all the time. Fail assumptions. fail Researches while Religion is based on some kind of old book founded by i dont know who. believing in talking snakes , women made from rib and a eve and adam who made 2 male children and continued with the human legacy. that sounds to me a lot like incest .
Topic: Is science a religion? - page 27. (Read 47460 times)
Science is proven facts or the search for the facts.
Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
I believe Science is a realistic approach to life and the existence of everything through rational views and evidences. These evidences are concluded on the basis of scientific experiments and universal laws. Whereas religion wants us to have faith in the invisible beings. It run on faith and belief of people.Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
From https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.15480068:
It isn't physics that is or can be wrong. It is people. Here's what I mean.
Physics is NOT in its infancy. Rather, it has just barely been conceived. How do we know this? Consider the dimensions - like point, line, plane and space. Space is considered the 3rd dimension. We thoroughly understand the first 6 or 8 dimensions. We know some things about 6 or 8 more dimensions. We recognize the existence of about 32 dimensions. But there could be an infinite number of them, each one greatly more complex than the last.
The problem is NOT that we are discovering things using physics. The problem has to do with our believing aspects of physics to be truth when we don't know it.
The facts that go into a science theory are facts. But the theory itself isn't known to be fact. If it were a fact, it would not be a theory. But when we call the unknown as though it were fact, especially when we know that it may not be fact, then we are moving into the area of religion.
This is exactly the thing that many scientists, the media, and companies like NASA are doing. They are religion, even though they have much factual science associated with them, because they treat things that are not known to be fact as though they were fact.
Well IMO science is not a religion. Religion is a hypothesis that don't need proof for believing. Science though is hypothesis but it investigate first using scientific method.
You are a smurt guy Seansky 
I agree with you,science isnt a religion.
Religion is simply believing in something,but if something is scientificly prooved,you dont have to believe in it : cause it is just a fact right?
Science is proven facts or the search for the facts.
Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
I believe Science is a realistic approach to life and the existence of everything through rational views and evidences. These evidences are concluded on the basis of scientific experiments and universal laws. Whereas religion wants us to have faith in the invisible beings. It run on faith and belief of people.Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
Science is proven facts or the search for the facts.
Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
I believe Science is a realistic approach to life and the existence of everything through rational views and evidences. These evidences are concluded on the basis of scientific experiments and universal laws. Whereas religion wants us to have faith in the invisible beings. It run on faith and belief of people.Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
You're video so suck that it is widely refuted repeatedly over and over again. Don't you have any other new bullish video that can present?
Is science a religion with the absence of God?
Or is science God with the absence of religion?
Science is proven facts or the search for the facts.
Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
Science theory is the search for facts. Science theory is not known to be fact. Science theory becomes religion in the minds of those who adamantly say it is fact. To those people, science is religion. This includes most if not all of the people at NASA. NASA is a religious organization, and should actually be called a church of science and investigation.
Science is proven facts or the search for the facts.
Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
Not mistaken with theoretical science which always could go either way.
no it is not a religion . it is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. and religion is the belief in and worship of a God or gods.
But after that is science theory, which is not known to be fact just like many people don't know if God is fact or not. When people believe science theory to be fact, they are making science a religion for themselves. Since this includes many of the major scientists, science has become a religion.
in researches of quantam theory are involved in either Buddhism or Hinduism lastly.
Well IMO science is not a religion. Religion is a hypothesis that don't need proof for believing. Science though is hypothesis but it investigate first using scientific method.
You are a smurt guy Seansky I agree with you,science isnt a religion.
Religion is simply believing in something,but if something is scientificly prooved,you dont have to believe in it : cause it is just a fact right?
Science is not a religion, in any way. Science is based on facts and researches and religion is based on beleiving without asking questions.
However, both science and religion based on some hypothesis that disproved with time by more strong hypothesis. By more strong hypothesis I mean the one which more strictly connected to the facts. But they both based on believing that facts they represented are the truth. By this way, religion is protoscience and science is criticism of the religion. Although both they have something common and they are not opposites, but science genetically succeeds religion as more accurate approach to reality. See "The Logic of Scientific Discovery" by Karl Popper, my friend.Science and religion can never match up. Science is the accurate way of perceiving reality through evidences and experiments whereas Religion is based on faith and belief.
Actually, it is only certain parts of science that are accurate. When science theory is believed to be fact, it acts worse than religion for the science believers, because such science might be fact, or it might not be.
Religion is way better for people, because religion (even violent Islam) has good morals that direct the lives of people well if they are followed. And in the case of Christianity, there is salvation to eternal life.
Science can't offer this. In fact, most of the time even science fact does no good. It is science fact being applied by engineers that does the good. On top of this, because much of science is not factual at all, it is the engineers taking it, and tweaking it into things that become the modern conveniences of life that is important. It isn't science. It is engineering that is beneficial.
Science has become a religion to its believers.
Science is not a religion, in any way. Science is based on facts and researches and religion is based on beleiving without asking questions.
However, both science and religion based on some hypothesis that disproved with time by more strong hypothesis. By more strong hypothesis I mean the one which more strictly connected to the facts. But they both based on believing that facts they represented are the truth. By this way, religion is protoscience and science is criticism of the religion. Although both they have something common and they are not opposites, but science genetically succeeds religion as more accurate approach to reality. See "The Logic of Scientific Discovery" by Karl Popper, my friend.Science and religion can never match up. Science is the accurate way of perceiving reality through evidences and experiments whereas Religion is based on faith and belief.
my personal view is that science is not a religion, but all religions are science at all. if we speak about Islam. Being Muslim I have a little knowledge about Islam. for example in Islam Allah says that discover the world as it is for your benefits. so every thing that science is discovering today are present there in Holly Quran. you can really find the answer of any problem in Holly Quran.
Really? Point me to the chapter that explains cancer and its cures. Celiac disease, no? How about HIV? Hearing loss?
Gravitational waves? Theory of relativity, Maxwell equations? No? How about electricity? Heart pacemaker? Personal computers?
HTML coding styles? Internet protocols: SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, FTP? How about bitcoin? Show us where in Quran, Allah is explaining bitcoin!!!
Maybe DNA sequences of animals that Allah created? Black holes? Supernovas? Black matter?
Please be specific. Just list the chapters that cover the above topics.
of research had begun a long time ago, form which quran, tripitaka, bibal, vedas, and many other had written. Maybe those books are the research of the
people of that time who created stories through it, or stories are made by the misheard of people. In a Hindu's religious book 'Mahabharata' there's a
character whose symptoms of disease are similar of that of HIV-AIDS. Even in that book there's a term of sex change which is portrayed in their own style
of curse and whatsoever. Even the bible has talked about the relativity term but somehow seems irrelevent to us but finds to accurate more or less. The books
that we read nowadays that deals with the term relativity and other scientific terms maybe the book that would seem irrelevent to the next generation because
at their they would discover more and more and may find even big bang thoery and relativity are
useless and are waste of time as we look at the religious books now.
Scientists who believe that science theories are true, when those science theories have not been proven to be true, are a little like the blind leading the blind that Jesus talked about. Regarding the blind leading the blind, Jesus said they both would fall into a ditch. The difference with the blind scientists is that they like it there.
no it is not a religion . it is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. and religion is the belief in and worship of a God or gods.
But after that is science theory, which is not known to be fact just like many people don't know if God is fact or not. When people believe science theory to be fact, they are making science a religion for themselves. Since this includes many of the major scientists, science has become a religion.
in researches of quantam theory are involved in either Buddhism or Hinduism lastly.
most people I know say they believe in science without understanding anything about it so it seems to be a religion
Not rally , science is based on proof whereas religion is not, you cant compare the two as the same thing.
Science would teach us to ask for evidence before believing but religion would teach us to believe first and consider evidence last.
most people I know say they believe in science without understanding anything about it so it seems to be a religion
When i think aboabout the facts and not terms, i would think : why this separation between Religion & Science ?
NORMALLY, both exist for the good of Humanity... So, a brave religious follower shouldn't have a contradictory point of view with good aiming Sciences... Also, a brave Scientist can easily be in harmony with the religious values as they present a moral support for him to continue in his way.
BUT, Humans want to find excuses to avoid the obligations of fellowing the right way when it forbids them from getting a "dirty" benefit.
SO, when benefits become more important than values, both Religion & Science become just a "dirty" tool to control ignorant people who don't have enough knowledge to make a proofed decision OR those people who will share benefits.
AND SO, what's the difference between these two words and between any other word if their output is related to the Human's use or abuse
NORMALLY, both exist for the good of Humanity... So, a brave religious follower shouldn't have a contradictory point of view with good aiming Sciences... Also, a brave Scientist can easily be in harmony with the religious values as they present a moral support for him to continue in his way.
BUT, Humans want to find excuses to avoid the obligations of fellowing the right way when it forbids them from getting a "dirty" benefit.
SO, when benefits become more important than values, both Religion & Science become just a "dirty" tool to control ignorant people who don't have enough knowledge to make a proofed decision OR those people who will share benefits.
AND SO, what's the difference between these two words and between any other word if their output is related to the Human's use or abuse
No it doesn't go that way, people who believe in religion choose to react with it's daily living according to what's written in the teachings they had in a bood, like for example if they'd been teach to hate people that are 3rd sex then they will do because that's been taught on them. While people who use to believe in science will study first if it's acceptable to do those things or not, and will give a reason why it's not and why it is.
If we invert by putting the " researcher in Religion " ( those who convince people by all kinds of explanation ) VS a " fellower of Science " ( those who repeat every scientific result without having the right background ) ? ...
Here we will have the same conclusion : IT DEPENDS ON THE PEOPLE'S USE OR ABUSE.
Notice : I'm trying to make people think about the common points of the Humanity rather than looking at each others with a mind full of preconceptions .
Jump to: