|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is Science a Religion? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: In science, the theory has to be verified by empirical evidence that can be seen. And you have great faith that it will? You really, really, really don't have the first inkling of a clue about what we're discussing, do you? The more you try to denigrate science in your incresingly inept way, the more you show the difference between science and religion. Once again: science does not use faith. Once again: show us the "similarities" between science and religion, not the differences. Hint: If you use the word "faith" in your description of science, you automatically lose. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: You've bought into the lie... that there is a difference between theory and faith. They are the same thing. No they are not. Your own religion says that "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." A scientific theory is an explantion of what is seen. Faith and theory are mutually exclusive. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: ... theory is no different than theology. They are 'theo'. Nonsense. "Atheist" and "Theist" also contain the same root "theo". Cherry-picking one root out of a word says nothing about its definition.
And the 'theo' of faith explains more of reality than the 'theo' of science, which is limited to only material causes. And again you are showing the difference between faith and science.
you have isolated parts of reality from each other so as not to confront the whole (holy) element of life. EXACTLY If only you understood what you just wrote. Yes, we separate out the tangible, verifiable, visible, repeatable parts of reality. That's what we call science. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: The only differnce is that theology extrapolates more data. As I said, science has to verify its extrapolations. Theology can not.
Science theory extrapolates a limited view of reality. It is the more closed of the two systems. Yes. Science and religion are different.
Just because they have a difference does not equate to a total difference. Nobody said anything about a "total difference". A truck is different from a fountain pen - different enough that nobody would claim a fountain pen is a truck. That doesn't mean there are no similarities. It means the differences outweigh the similarities.
So science thorizes on half the picture, and you think that is more informative for practical purposes of your moral and political agenda.... I did not say one word about my "moral and political agenda". You can't respond intelligently to my posts unless you learn to read what I write.
Why would you ignore the moral side of the equation and use only science to guide you to whole (holy) answers? I don't. You're the one who keeps bringing up inanities about "whole (holy) answers". Try to understand this before you utter more of the same drivel: Science does not concern itself with holy answers. It concerns itself only with empirically verifiable answers about the empirically verifiable world. Edited by Ringo, : Spellling. Edited by Ringo, : More spelling. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: The ToE for example has not been verified, it is extrapolated. And as such is called a theory. Clearly you don't understand what a theory is.
Yes. Science and religion are different. True! One actually has evidence, and the other is imaginative extrapolation of partial facts. Once again you agree that science is not a religion.
You just admitted that you don't seek whole answers... I said that science doesn't seek "whole answers". Please learn to read. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
You said science is the only thing verifiable. I said that science is empirically verifiable and religion is not. Religion claims to have "whole answers" and science does not. You very clearly do have a reading problem. There are multiple examples in this thread alone where you have misquoted me, miscontrued me and misrepresented me. They are plain for everybody to see and I have pointed out only a few of them. You have also agreed multiple times that science is nothing like religion, so why do you continue to argue about it? Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: If you like the quotes... I don't like the quotes. Please put your argument in your own words to demonstrate that you understand it. The question is simple enough: What are the similarities between science and religion? Just list some for now and we'll examine them one at a time. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
The reason I asked you to put your argument into your own words is because I'm pretty sure you don't understand it. You've been saying all along that science is "incomplete" and that religion is somehow "better" at giving "whole answers".
The clear conclusion from all of your posts is that science is not a religion, yet you seem to be trying to argue that science is a religion. Show us that you do understand the question. Unboggle your mind for a minute and just list some of the similarities between science and religion. It'll take less time than your lame attempts at cleverness. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: Been there done that Ringo... No you haven't. You've been contradicting yourself throughout the entire thread. This is your chance to redeem yourself. Just answer the simple question: How are science and religion similar?
You have your mind absolutely set to believe one thing. You know nothing about my beliefs.Please stop the stupid speculations and discuss the topic. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: You know nothing about my beliefs. Why don't you tell us... Because the topic isn't about my beliefs, it's about the similarities and/or differences between science and religion. Why are you afraid of the topic? Why are you afraid to answer a simple question about the tiopic? If Jesus is so full of answers, ask Him. Just give us something other than empty-headed preaching. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: I've answered all of your questions and far better than you imagined. The question I asked was about your understanding of the Johnson and Goober quotes. Where have you answered that? Instead of trying to divert people's attention, why not just answer the question? Edited by Ringo, : Spelling. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: Go back and read the thread. You can run but you can't hide. Just link back to where you answered the question about the quotes. Or just repeat your answer. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Rob writes: I showed my understanding of the issue before I gave the quotes. The question was about your understanding of the quotes. Just give us a couple of examples, in your own words, of how science is similar to religion. So far, all you've done is show us that you don't have any understanding of science. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024