![]() |
| Welcome to Religious Forums |
| Welcome Guest to ReligiousForums.com . You are currently not registered. When you become registered you will be able to interact with our large base of already registered users discussing topics. Some annoying Ads will also disappear when you register. Registering doesn't cost a thing and only takes a few seconds. We provide areas to chat and debate all World Religions. Please go to our register page! |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Are the standards of truth for science higher than those for religion? | |||
| Yes, the standards for science are higher than those for religion. |
|
18 | 51.43% |
| No, the standards for religion are higher than those for science. |
|
4 | 11.43% |
| Other. |
|
11 | 31.43% |
| Is this about the same movie we were discussing earlier? |
|
2 | 5.71% |
| Voters: 35. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Proof reading, my friend, is the key to success. |
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Scientists have been persecuted in the past by Christians for putting doubts on the Bible and Christian teachings. In the West, the Church had strong hold on how we think and what we think, and anyone questioning were considered heretics. Galileo was jailed because he didn't believe the earth was centre of the solar system. Newton feared to published some of his work due to the Church. I don't know what the Jews stance towards science, though.
__________________
Timeless Myths for myth enthusiasts. Dark Mirrors of Heaven investigates the obscure literature surrounding the Genesis. |
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
|
The "standards" in science are developed for finding the truth of objective reality. Religion seeks something entirely subjective, that being a relationship of man to divinity. Religion sees truth about itself and one's self.
By a comparison of "standards" I assume you mean that one holds to the truth more dearly than the other? Truth is truth. Both science and religion look for truth, but about different things.
__________________
It's less of a world take over and more of a world make over. - Dr. Phineas Waldolf Steel Brad Chat |
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
In the Baha'i view, BOTH science and religion have high standards, BOTH are necessary for well-rounded understanding, and BOTH dovetail very nicely!
If both are properly viewed, there is no inherent conflict between the two whatever.... Best, Bruce |
|
#25
|
||||
|
||||
|
In science, for something to be considered "true"the mechanism used to prove it must be able to be re-tested. In Religion, if it is written i the religion's holy text, it is "true."
|
|
#26
|
||||
|
||||
|
I chose "other" because the standards in science and religion are simply different.
Other human endeavors have different standards as well, such as the standards in literature or history. To demand that all other pursuits conform to scientific standards seems to be rather silly. To demand some rationality be involved somewhere is reasonable, though. |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Science and religion are completely different. You simply cannot compare them.
I have never understood why anyone would see any sort of conflict between them. I am captivated by biology and just finished an internship at the National Human Genome Research Institute. I am also a Christian and cannot imagine where I would be without God. Information cannot hurt you. Diseases have always been caused by germs, the universe has always been vast and old, and humans have always had a common ancestor with chimps. Finding these out did not change anything about the world or humanity. It is how people use this knowledge that matters. Applied for good science can cure diseases or allow us to see parts of the universe we could never imagine. Applied for ill, it creates hydrogen bombs and biological weapons. One thing science can never do is tell me the meaning of my life or help me know right from wrong - that is simply out of its scope. But knowing these things doesnt help me one bit if I want to build a telescope or treat leukemia - that is out of any religion's scope. |
|
#28
|
||||
|
||||
|
The reason why I chose 'other' was because I found the question to be a bit ambiguous and maybe a little paradoxical. In science, any 'truth' that is conceded upon by the relevant scholars and scientists has been painstakingly observed, noted, hypothesized, concluded and retested over and over again until sufficient data can be obtained to either prove or disprove a theory. In religion, because all notions of 'truth' are based more on faith and belief than actual provable fact (I'm hoping we can all agree on that even though I expect most religious zealots will claim that, for eg. the proof for God is in the Bible and the creation of the earth is evidence enough for his existence), any comparison to science and it's call for truth is incomparable to the requirements for 'truth' in religion. This is because in each case, the notion of 'truth' differs entirely. They are apples and oranges, to put it into a cliche. In fact, science is, in my opinion, the polar opposite to religion if looked at from a strictly comparitive view-point. Science is based on the scientific process of incontestable, tried and tested data, and religion is based upon a heritage, a burning in your chest, an unprovable faith that is called faith because is exactly what it is; an irrational (careful Greg), feel-it-to-my-bones certainty. It's hardly acceptable and totally unlikely for a scientist to say, "Yes, well, I think I've found the cure for cancer, I don't know how or why, but I feel it in my bones so it must be it." It's even more unlikely that his collegues will back him up and it's even MORE unlikely that any pharmaceutical company will publish his findings and manufacture his cure. Ironically, it's even more unlikely and no doubt unacceptable for a Christian to say, "Yes, well, I've studied this immensely, tried and tested my data over and over again, and now I know, and can PROVE, beyond a reasonable doubt, that I have scientifically proven the existence of God." His fellow Christians would be flabbergasted.
In agreement with Torgo, I also do not find any difference between the world around us; which is filled with things that can and can not be explained by science; and the world 'above us' (God, religion, existence). This is of course, not from a birds-eye-view, but rather after careful scrutiny. In an ultimate sort of way they are one in the same. If the earth is a manifestation of God, the creator, then surely the laws of science, which is a manifestation of the world around us, are one in the same with him. Maybe ultimate science and things we can not explain is God. Maybe God is the force that compells atoms to organize and form the universe. We'll never know. So therefore, given that we'll will never know, it holds more weight to focus not on the trivial things like "Science vs. God", but more on the things that make life happier and better for everyone; like love. ![]() |
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
or creating a high-density wormhole so we dont get sucked in the sun
__________________
Here, have a cookie, you've earned it.
|
|
#30
|
||||
|
||||
|
Science searches for facts.
Religion searches for truth. Truth and fact are not quite the same thing. |