Can we remove the dogma from science?

[paarsurrey]

That's OK with me.
I don't see science as "true".
It's only the understanding of the moment regarding the physical world.

I agree with one. Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

As far as the witness of the history of science it has always advanced "uphill" to more knowledge concerning the nature of our physical existence. If this is your view, it is your 'albatross' of dogma hang around your neck like a lode stone.

The dogma of Islam is the layers of conflicting Sharia Law, and of course, any concept of peace in Islam lies in the wreakage of the Shiite/Sunni bloody cleavage of Islam, and the bloody conflicts with Judaism and Christianity.,

History does not witness 100% correctly, one would admit, please.
Quran is above Shiite/Sunnism concepts, it contains lasting realities always as fresh as ever. Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Doesn't the Quran say that there is no compulsion in religion though? Wouldn't that be the original teaching/belief?

That is my point, despite that Quran mentions that it has no compulsion in religion, due to dogmas created later, people thinks that Quran enjoined compulsion.
It is simply incorrect.
So, Mirza Ghulam has been sent by God to reinstate the original peaceful teachings of Islam/Quran/Muhammad.
Regards

 

[Revoltingest]

All the revealed books of all religions, provided the portions one quotes has not changed due to debris of time.
for instance Quran, which is letter to letter and dot to dot is not changed. Please
Regards

How can they all be inerrant truth if they conflict?
And aside from reading translations, languages themselves change.
Should they be interpreted literally or poetically?
I've read a scholarly argument that the "72 virgins" are actually "72 raisins".

This all seems a very unreliable source for The Truth.

 

[paarsurrey]

How can they all be inerrant truth if they conflict?
And aside from reading translations, languages themselves change.
Should they be interpreted literally or poetically?
I've read a scholarly argument that the "72 virgins" are actually "72 raisins".

This all seems a very unreliable source for The Truth.

Since humans interfered with the ancient scriptures except Quran, so they have not remained in their original position, hence one's complaint. That could be resolved easily with an open mind and positive attitude. Please
Regards

 

[Revoltingest]

Since humans interfered with the ancient scriptures except Quran, so they have not remained in their original position, hence one's complaint. That could be resolved easily with an open mind and positive attitude. Please
Regards

Even if in its original language, languages evolve over time.
But this also begs the question, was it the inerrant truth at the time of its inception?
I see nothing to make this knowable.
Another issue....
Is ever statement/claim/prescription in it also absolutely true, & must be followed without question or fail?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Please
Regards

Can you delete your account?

Please

Regards.

 

[littlefire]

After reading the article the OP referred to, I can resonate with the author's frustration at the "dogma" in science created by fallible humans and would too like it removed. Is it feasible to remove all shreds of dogma from science? I think not. From my view, all the major systems of knowledge--religion, logic/philosophy, science--have been attempts by humans to remove the fallibility, inconsistency, and personal bias from their thinking to attain a perfect or collective understanding of reality, which paradoxically provides fertile ground for all kinds of dogma. I think science has gotten closer to shedding dogma than religion and philosophy have, but where humans with personal biases and need for control and structure exist, dogma remains.

 

[Altfish]

One may like to read:

"Our goal is not to destroy Ted, but rather to keep its stage one that doesn’t promote dogmatism and provokes evolving thinking. We believe Ted, as an institution with so much influence and trust from its constituents has a duty to hear, acknowledge and respond to those same constituents.
Join our growing list of scientists and academics, including Nobel Prize winning Physicist, Brian D. Josephson FRS, Emeritus Professor of Physics at University of Cambridge, in signing the petition calling for the Sheldrake lecture to be fully reinstated. If you are a PhD or MD and you care about scientific integrity and open science for all disciplines, click Petition & Recommendations to sign the petition."
Set Science Free.org
Please
Regards

Doesn't the fact that scientists are discussing/arguing/ challenging prove that science is NOT dogmatic?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

The same in religion.
"True" that has been described as such by God in the revealed book.
"Untrue" that has not been described/verified as such from the revealed book by God . Please
Regards

I question if you understand what "true" means, as your definition puts you at risk for any liar on the planet.

Quran does not have any dogma in it, it has only truth,facts and reality in it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Science must be sometimes going the downhill, because it does not deal in truth, facts and reality it deals in the temporary phenomenon aspects of them.

Abrahamic scriptures never delve into the temporary? For realz?

Please don't quote a list from the websites that are opposed to Islam/Quran/Muhammad.

Are their quotes not in there?

History does not witness 100% correctly, one would admit, please.

Which makes your arguments about how right you are laughable. It's like when biblical idolators say that the bible says humans are liars and then claim that books in the bible written by humans are dictated by God because the humans said so ...

 

[paarsurrey]

Doesn't the fact that scientists are discussing/arguing/ challenging prove that science is NOT dogmatic?

They are trying but cannot finish the dogma. It does prove the reverse, it has always been with the science, yet they have been blaming the religion for it.
Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

After reading the article the OP referred to, I can resonate with the author's frustration at the "dogma" in science created by fallible humans and would too like it removed. Is it feasible to remove all shreds of dogma from science? I think not. From my view, all the major systems of knowledge--religion, logic/philosophy, science--have been attempts by humans to remove the fallibility, inconsistency, and personal bias from their thinking to attain a perfect or collective understanding of reality, which paradoxically provides fertile ground for all kinds of dogma. I think science has gotten closer to shedding dogma than religion and philosophy have, but where humans with personal biases and need for control and structure exist, dogma remains.

I agree with one. Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Even if in its original language, languages evolve over time.
But this also begs the question, was it the inerrant truth at the time of its inception?
I see nothing to make this knowable.
Another issue....
Is ever statement/claim/prescription in it also absolutely true, & must be followed without question or fail?

It was inerrant from the inception in the core teachings. Please
Regards

 

[Revoltingest]

It was inerrant from the inception in the core teachings. Please
Regards

How do you know it was inerrant?
Does this mean any religion which differs is wrong?

 

[leibowde84]

That is my point, despite that Quran mentions that it has no compulsion in religion, due to dogmas created later, people thinks that Quran enjoined compulsion.
It is simply incorrect.
So, Mirza Ghulam has been sent by God to reinstate the original peaceful teachings of Islam/Quran/Muhammad.
Regards

But, this is not an example of the beliefs of Islam changing from what was originally claimed in the Quran.

 

[paarsurrey]

But, this is not an example of the beliefs of Islam changing from what was originally claimed in the Quran.

What change in this teaching would one like? The teaching mentioned was and still is valid and correct. Please
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

What change in this teaching would one like? The teaching mentioned was and still is valid and correct. Please
Regards

In science, theories are constantly questioned, fellow scientists try to disprove them, and our understanding improves because of it. Claims that we used to take for granted end up being false.

I was asking for an example where Islam has changed to contradict what is claimed in the Quran (the original beliefs/claims).

 

[paarsurrey]

In science, theories are constantly questioned, fellow scientists try to disprove them, and our understanding improves because of it. Claims that we used to take for granted end up being false.

I was asking for an example where Islam has changed to contradict what is claimed in the Quran (the original beliefs/claims).

Quran doesn't claim to be a Revelation having contradictions, it mentions lasting teachings, the time tested and accurate ones. It also mentions wisdom and reasons of the teachings. Please
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

In science, theories are constantly questioned, fellow scientists try to disprove them, and our understanding improves because of it. Claims that we used to take for granted end up being false.

I was asking for an example where Islam has changed to contradict what is claimed in the Quran (the original beliefs/claims).

Isn't it a poor performance of science?Always taking the previous ones as fake/false, and findings the new ones that are also to be found false/fake later on, very unscientific.
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

Quran doesn't claim to be a Revelation having contradictions, it mentions lasting teachings, the time tested and accurate ones. It also mentions wisdom and reasons of the teachings. Please
Regards

That is why Islam is lacking compared to science. Science is open to being wrong. Islam (and the Quran in particular) is considered to be the word of God in the opinion of Muslims, so they refuse to even acknowledge the fact that the Quran might be wrong about some things.