Women_Of_Reason
Mystery Lover
If you have faith in science then you don`t understand what science is.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do We Put Too Much Faith In Current Science?
- Thread starter Storm
- Start date
Or else you don't understand what faith is.
Women_Of_Reason
Mystery Lover
Voila !
Can I take that back? I meant they "do understand what faith is".
Science entails faith that what its inductive reasoning produces is true.
Last edited:
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
Can I take that back? I meant to type "do understand what faith is".
Science entails faith that what its inductive reasoning produces is true.
Without the scientific revolution so to speak a lot of technology would not exist. Your computer would not exist without science. I remember not so long ago it was believed a processor would not exceed 300Mhertz (3x10^8Hertz) which is the speed of light. Without science an earthquake would still be "God is angry with us." We had to have faith that we could break the speed of light to make your computer.
I think there's a reason most of the world chooses to teach us science rather than creationism. Science can be trusted, people have agreed with it for hundreds of years because there is physical evidence.
That's correct. :yes:
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
Like geocentrism.
Women_Of_Reason
Mystery Lover
Can I take that back? I meant they "do understand what faith is".
Science entails faith that what its inductive reasoning produces is true.
Faith = belief without evidence.
Science assumes that it`s propositions will be proven wrong but act as if they were true until then.
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
Yes well we all know thats untrue. Science evolves. You could also have said that an atom was a ball with electrons randomly assigned in the middle as another example of trying to shoot down what im saying. Sure we know its wrong now, but it was believed for about 90 years until they came up with a better model of the atom. Come on storm you can do better than that.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
But that's my entire point.
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
The fundamentals are there. Isaac Newtons laws created in the 1700's still stand. The 4 laws of thermodynamics have survived untouched for 200ish years.
There is a huge difference between admitting you're wrong and making improvements based on what you know to be true (fundamentals) and stoically defending something you have absolutely no idea about with a book in your hand written 2000 years ago for people 2000 years ago.
Women_Of_Reason
Mystery Lover
Computers does not break the speed of light. Nothing we ever made or observe as ever broken the speed of light except some weird quantum effects that seems to break it but we are far from achieving this in standard informatics.
Storm
ThrUU the Looking Glass
What I'm saying is that for a vast stretch of time, geocentrism was the best explanation available. And yes, it was supported by the evidence.
Completely irrelevant to this thread.
Women_Of_Reason
Mystery Lover
Storm is right on this one.
darkendless
Guardian of Asgaard
So my computer with a processor of 3.26x10^8 Hertz does not break the speed of light. I think you need to rethink what you just said. We had a huge arguement over it yesterday at University amongst our lecturers. Only 1 lecturer out of 10 said it was impossible. I tend to agree with the majority of the electronic engineers and physicists here sorry.
Without evidence there is nothing to believe in; "evidence" is that piece or pieces of information that convince one of the truth of a thing. Faith is belief without actuality.
For example, if I have faith that my brother will behave in a certain proper manner towards his new wife, that faith is based on the evidence of prior behavior and characteristics, etc. Evidence is not lacking, rather what is lacking is the actuality of his behavior, which in this case has not actualized because is a prediction of behavior that has yet to take place. Belief that the sun will rise tomorrow is similarily faith because the event has not yet actualized --anything could happen between now and then.
Similiarly, science entails faith in the truth of its inductive conclusions (that they represent the actual case). And faith in "God" represents a belief in the actuality of whatever one's image of God represents to them.
misanthropic_clown
Active Member
I may be being completely ignorant, but I thought speed was measured in m/s and Hz is frequency?
Women_Of_Reason
Mystery Lover
Violet light is at a frequency of 690 terahertz... Are you saying that violet light is faster than the speed of light? Let`s not talk about gamma rays.
