Is science against the Revealed Religion?

[paarsurrey]

If so, to prove this, please, quote from :

• A peer reviewed article published in a science journal of repute
• From a text book of science
• Please mention the specific science discipline that deals with it.

Thread open for Theists and the Atheists alike.
Regards

 

[SkepticThinker]

I don't understand the question.

 

[Quintessence]

Unless we're going for personification, the sciences are incapable of being "for" or "against" anything. The sciences represent a way of knowing or a method of obtaining information and understanding the world. The sciences are not persons.

Persons who happen to be scientists, or who incorporate elements of the sciences into their worldview, can, however, be "for" or "against" some other worldview, religious or otherwise. This should not be conflated with or mistaken for the sciences themselves.

 

[paarsurrey]

I don't understand the question.

Is there any ambiguity in it? Please
Regards

 

[SkepticThinker]

Is there any ambiguity in it? Please
Regards

You want something from a scientific publication that says science is against the "Revealed Religion?"

What is the "revealed religion?"
Why do you think the claim that science is against that revealed religion would be found in a scientific publication?
Are you just asking for evidence that your religion is false?

I'm just confused as to where you're going with this.

 

[paarsurrey]

You want something from a scientific publication that says science is against the "Revealed Religion?"

I don't think there is anything like that, yet some people think that science is against the revealed religion.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

What is the "revealed religion?"

Any ideology that people choose as their way of life could be termed as religion but those that are based on Word of Revelation from G-d are revealed religion.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Why do you think the claim that science is against that revealed religion would be found in a scientific publication?

A lot of people think that science is against revealed religion, such people should provide proper evidence for that from science.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I'm just confused as to where you're going with this.

Let us see where the rational arguments lead us to.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

the sciences are incapable of being "for" or "against" anything

I agree with you here.
Regards

 

[Nakosis]

If so, to prove this, please, quote from :

• A peer reviewed article published in a science journal of repute
• From a text book of science
• Please mention the specific science discipline that deals with it.

Thread open for Theists and the Atheists alike.
Regards

Science isn't against anything. It's just a tool used for validation.
I can come up with any frigging theory I want. If I can use science to validate it, then it's more likely to be accepted by other folks.

What experiments do you propose that can be used by science to validate your revealed religion? You'd have to provide the conditions necessary to falsify the religion.

 

[George-ananda]

Science is not against the concept of revealed religions. It doesn't contradict any scientific knowledge.

 

[averageJOE]

1. There is not such thing as a "revealed religion".
2. No. Science is not against any kind of religion.
3 It's some religious beliefs that are against science.

 

[David M]

A lot of people think that science is against revealed religion, such people should provide proper evidence for that from science.
Regards

I think that you are confused. Just because revealed religions make claims that are contrary to the scientific evidence does not mean that science is against revealed religion. It simply falls under the general heading of science being unwilling to support stuff that is not true (or that lacks evidence).

 

[Nietzsche]

If so, to prove this, please, quote from :

• A peer reviewed article published in a science journal of repute
• From a text book of science
• Please mention the specific science discipline that deals with it.

Thread open for Theists and the Atheists alike.
Regards

If said religion is inherently contradicted by certain obvious conclusions(like saying the earth is flat, light is instantaneous, only 6k years old, ect) then yeah, probably, but that's because the religion in question is simply either woefully misinterpreted or is an outright fabrication(hello, $cientology).

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

If so, to prove this, please, quote from :

• A peer reviewed article published in a science journal of repute
• From a text book of science
• Please mention the specific science discipline that deals with it.

Thread open for Theists and the Atheists alike.
Regards

When you start from an assertion that involves a falsehood, anything follows from it (given a false antecedent, the truth-value of the conditional is "true"). So, for example, when you make a nonsense claim about what "science" is against (when "science" isn't an entity and is not even singular in the sense most non-scientists believe), it is "true" the way "if the moon is made is green cheese, then 1+1=10,000,000" is true. First, the sciences have no clear unifying property or properties that define them and that necessarily exclude those "fuzzy" fields such as historiography, some pseudo-sciences (or at least fields generally regarded as pseudo-sciences), etc. Second, and more importantly, there is no unifying property of the sciences that can possibly make them all unified regarding your question (and there is no consensus about what constitutes a "science"). Third, a minimalist interpretation of what constitutes the sciences would still not result in a unified stance that licenses the propositional form of your question.

 

[paarsurrey]

Science isn't against anything. It's just a tool used for validation.
I can come up with any frigging theory I want. If I can use science to validate it, then it's more likely to be accepted by other folks.

What experiments do you propose that can be used by science to validate your revealed religion? You'd have to provide the conditions necessary to falsify the religion.

I am not proposing any experiments. I hear people say that science is against religion, I just want to see if it is so.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Science is not against the concept of revealed religions. It doesn't contradict any scientific knowledge.

I agree with you.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

1. There is not such thing as a "revealed religion".

Does that science say? Or it is just your opinion.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

2. No. Science is not against any kind of religion.

I also agree with you.
Regards