Pages:
Author

Topic: Is science a religion? - page 45. (Read 47434 times)

legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1027
March 31, 2016, 12:17:25 PM
#35
Before asking this question you should give definition of religion?
...


Google says religion is:
"the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods."

I say a religion is an organized set of rules and doctrines that institutionalize irrational belief in supernatural being(s).

Science only can deal with rational, observable and measurable phenomena.  

Belief in supernatural God(s) is irrational.  God is an imaginary construct, it is not observable nor measurable.


So, does that make some scientists unscientific? When scientists claim that God doesn't exist, thereby opposing the clear science that shows that God DOES exist, where does that place science?

Cool
For thousands of years science as tried to prove a god..BUT no joy..
Even trying to insult this god.No bolt of lightning as struck me yet and no show from this god..

There must be some religious nut who is into science who is still trying to prove there is a god.
Waste of time..Also if your god's are so powerful where is all this power..
No one beats SUPERMAN but i do believe BATMAN is going to have ago..
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
March 31, 2016, 11:24:37 AM
#34
Before asking this question you should give definition of religion?
...


Google says religion is:
"the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods."

I say a religion is an organized set of rules and doctrines that institutionalize irrational belief in supernatural being(s).

Science only can deal with rational, observable and measurable phenomena.  

Belief in supernatural God(s) is irrational.  God is an imaginary construct, it is not observable nor measurable.
sr. member
Activity: 444
Merit: 260
March 31, 2016, 11:41:22 AM
#34
Before asking this question you should give definition of religion?
...


Google says religion is:
"the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods."

I say a religion is an organized set of rules and doctrines that institutionalize irrational belief in supernatural being(s).

Science only can deal with rational, observable and measurable phenomena.  

Belief in supernatural God(s) is irrational.  God is an imaginary construct, it is not observable nor measurable.


The same can be said for maths, in itself it is an imaginary construct,  it is not observable nor measurable, It like religion is used  to measure things that are real. religion triers to measure behavior, good and evil while science tries to measure ratio or rationalize the physical.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
March 31, 2016, 11:36:11 AM
#33
Before asking this question you should give definition of religion?
...


Google says religion is:
"the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods."

I say a religion is an organized set of rules and doctrines that institutionalize irrational belief in supernatural being(s).

Science only can deal with rational, observable and measurable phenomena.  

Belief in supernatural God(s) is irrational.  God is an imaginary construct, it is not observable nor measurable.


So, does that make some scientists unscientific? When scientists claim that God doesn't exist, thereby opposing the clear science that shows that God DOES exist, where does that place science?

Cool
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 1958
First Exclusion Ever
March 31, 2016, 11:25:51 AM
#32
To all people before me:

How many of you people are scientist with a degree? Roll Eyes

The good thing of science is nobody force you to believe anything.

If something is wrong you just need to show it is wrong. End of story.



I am not a professional scientist, but I do have a degree. Do I get a cookie?




Science can never be considered as a religion. Only atheist believe everything in accordance to science and they too don't say science as a religion. Its a form of art which has the proof.

I can logically prove this statement is false. Atheists have a belief that there is no God. The problem with that logic is no one can prove it one way or another. As a result the ideology that there is no God is just another BELIEF no different than any other religion, making conclusions about things that can not be proven. I think if more Atheists were honest they would identify as Agnostic, which basically means "I don't know if there is a God so I am not making any conclusions".  
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
March 31, 2016, 11:21:10 AM
#31
^

Misunderstanding/misconception of the meaning of scientific theory.

No misunderstanding at all. In simple terms, here is what good science theory is.

Science Fact 1 + Science Fact 2 + Science Fact 3 + etc., put together in a new way that is not factual. Science theory is not fact. That's why it is called theory, even though the parts of it may be 100% fact of themselves.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 2464
Merit: 1145
March 31, 2016, 11:10:39 AM
#30
^

Misunderstanding/misconception of the meaning of scientific theory.
legendary
Activity: 3374
Merit: 1824
March 31, 2016, 11:05:33 AM
#29
Before asking this question you should give definition of religion?
If religion is faith in something without proofs, or very little proofs, than, in many cases, science act as religion.
How many concrete proofs science have about origin of Universe?
Nothing.
But they have their own theory based on their faith.
How many concrete proofs science have about origin of life on the Earth?
Nothing.
But they have their own theory based on their faith.
and this continue in many other cases....

legendary
Activity: 2464
Merit: 1145
March 31, 2016, 11:01:57 AM
#28
To all people before me:

How many of you people are scientist with a degree? Roll Eyes

The good thing of science is nobody force you to believe anything.

If something is wrong you just need to show it is wrong. End of story.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
March 31, 2016, 10:57:35 AM
#27
Science can never be considered as a religion. Only atheist believe everything in accordance to science and they too don't say science as a religion. Its a form of art which has the proof.

No proof in science theory... which, btw, is part of science.    Cool
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
March 31, 2016, 10:55:37 AM
#26
Science is not atheistic and it is not religion as well.
A degree of concord between science and religion can be seen in religious belief and empirical science. The belief that God created the world and therefore humans, can lead to the view that he arranged for humans to know the world.

While belief that God created the world might exist in some people who haven't looked at and understood the science that shows that God did it, other people who have examined the science know that God created the world.

Having knowledge eliminates belief. Before I knew it, I believed it. Now that I know it, belief is unnecessary, and maybe impossible.

Cool
hero member
Activity: 2618
Merit: 548
SecureShift.io | Crypto-Exchange
March 31, 2016, 10:54:19 AM
#25
Science can never be considered as a religion. Only atheist believe everything in accordance to science and they too don't say science as a religion. Its a form of art which has the proof.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
March 31, 2016, 09:05:04 AM
#24
Science is not atheistic and it is not religion as well.
A degree of concord between science and religion can be seen in religious belief and empirical science. The belief that God created the world and therefore humans, can lead to the view that he arranged for humans to know the world.
member
Activity: 66
Merit: 10
March 31, 2016, 08:38:51 AM
#23
Hmmm i dont know!
legendary
Activity: 3374
Merit: 2198
I stand with Ukraine.
March 31, 2016, 08:26:18 AM
#22
Yes, science is a religion in a way. It helps people who are afraid of living in an unknown and unpredictable enviroment to feel "safe" saying to them that it covers everything. That is not true of course, neither science nor religion answers all the questions. But people want simple answers that's why they go for one of them.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000
March 31, 2016, 08:23:51 AM
#21
Science is not a religion in any view of every person. Science believe everything it see, hear, touches, and feels while in religion(I am not an atheist) they believe in a God that they cannot see, hear, touch, and feel while they are alive in this planet.

Not exactly true. A lot of scientific "facts" are theories based on deduction first and then generalization, but as these theories are the best working explanations currently, so everybody accepting those as facts, however no one ever seen, heard, touched or felt those things. Some of these things are not even measurable or observable just derivations from some statistical data. And this is the pure science. If you take a look at economy, philosophy, psychology, sociology, politology and such science branches you are arrived to the realm of religion Smiley.
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice
March 31, 2016, 07:39:13 AM
#20
Science is not a religion in any view of every person. Science believe everything it see, hear, touches, and feels while in religion(I am not an atheist) they believe in a God that they cannot see, hear, touch, and feel while they are alive in this planet.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1000
March 31, 2016, 07:30:42 AM
#19
Science is not a religion, in any way. Science is based on facts and researches and religion is based on beleiving without asking questions.

Well, theoretically you are right. In practice science is greatly influenced by a lot of other things like ideology, business interest and politics. (As I said earlier, the human factor.) Unfortunately these external forces can suppress or even falsify scientific results. So, today some parts of science or some scientific results are very close to religion.
newbie
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
March 31, 2016, 07:05:26 AM
#18
 The battle between science and religion is regularly declared over, with both sides having reached an amicable truce. “Accommodationists” on both the religious and scientific sides assure us that there is no conflict between these areas, that they deal with separate spheres of inquiry (science deals with the natural world, religion with meaning, morals and values), or even that they can somehow help each other via an unspecified “dialogue.” After all, we’re told, there are many religious scientists (two notables in my field are Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health and evangelical Christian, and Kenneth Miller, an observant Catholic who is also biologist at Brown University), so how can there be possibly be a conflict?

But despite these claims, the dust hasn’t settled. Why the continuing publication of accommodationist books if the issue was resolved long ago? Why do 55 percent of Americans aver that “science and religion are often in conflict”? Why are less than 10 percent of all Americans agnostics or atheists, yet that proportion rises to 62 percent of all scientists at “elite” universities, and to 93 percent among members of the National Academy of Sciences? In a poll taken in 2006, 64 percent of Americans claimed that if science contradicted one of the tenets of their faith, they’d reject the science in favor of their faith. Clearly, there is still friction between science and religion, even if some scientists can leave their faith at the laboratory door.
sr. member
Activity: 444
Merit: 260
March 31, 2016, 07:15:25 AM
#18
While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.         

Do you smoke your weed before or after reading from your holy book?

From the nonsense you posted, I conclude you are a Muslim.

Eternal masterpiece?  Shoot, the weed you are smoking is gooood.

Our universe the most hostile environment to life that you could imagine. 

Haha who has been smoking weed now, where did I infer anything about Muslims?  But talking of weed here is a pearl on the subject from an advocate of the plant of wisdom Wink

Quote
..."The hard swallow built into science is this business about the Big Bang. Now, let’s give this a little attention here. This is the notion that the universe, for no reason, sprang from nothing in a single instant. Well, now before we dissect this, notice that this is the limit test for credulity. Whether you believe this or not, notice that it is not possible to conceive of something more unlikely or less likely to be believed! I mean, I defy anyone – it’s just the limit case for unlikelihood, that the universe would spring from nothing in a single instant, for no reason?! – I mean, if you believe that, my family has a bridge across the Hudson River that we’ll give you a lease option for five dollars! It makes no sense. It is in fact no different than saying, 'And God said, let there be light'. And what these philosophers of science are saying is, give us one free miracle, and we will roll from that point forward – from the birth of time to the crack of doom! – just one free miracle, and then it will all unravel according to natural law, and these bizarre equations which nobody can understand but which are so holy in this enterprise. Well, I say then, if science gets one free miracle, then everybody gets one free miracle." ~Terence McKenna...


But to be clear I am not Muslim, I am agnostic. By that I think Huxley put it best:-

Quote
Agnosticism is of the essence of science, whether ancient or modern. It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe. Consequently Agnosticism puts aside not only the greater part of popular theology, but also the greater part of anti-theology. On the whole, the "bosh" of heterodoxy is more offensive to me than that of orthodoxy, because heterodoxy professes to be guided by reason and science, and orthodoxy does not.

Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed, but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a single principle. That principle is of great antiquity; it is as old as Socrates; as old as the writer who said, 'Try all things, hold fast by that which is good'; it is the foundation of the Reformation, which simply illustrated the axiom that every man should be able to give a reason for the faith that is in him, it is the great principle of Descartes; it is the fundamental axiom of modern science. Positively the principle may be expressed: In matters of the intellect, follow your reason as far as it will take you, without regard to any other consideration. And negatively: In matters of the intellect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable. That I take to be the agnostic faith, which if a man keep whole and undefiled, he shall not be ashamed to look the universe in the face, whatever the future may have in store for him.
— Thomas Henry Huxley

Quote
Culture is your operating system~Terence McKenna

Its time for an upgrade - Dogma remains our greatest enemy.

Extraordinary claims call for extraordinary evidence: - 1+2=3 remains true irrespective of the existence of the universe, it is metaphysical. Like maths our consciousness is metaphysical, therefore there is no proof of its mortality.

I simply recognize that the universe is ALIVE! and we are a living part of it.
Pages:
Jump to: