What do You Think Science is...

[ppp]

Or one might say that religion is an attempt to learn about man’s divine nature, by engaging directly with that divine power which some call God.

I will amend my statement.

Religion is about claiming a conclusion (God exists, God has words, a divine nature exists, souls exists, demons exist, thetans exist, etc.) and then only interpret experience through that lens, irrespective of any discriminating grounding in reality..

 

[Muffled]

Contrast?
Religion is made up.
Science isnt

I believe a good deal of science is made up and a good deal of religion is not.

 

[Muffled]

Or one might say that religion is an attempt to learn about man’s divine nature, by engaging directly with that divine power which some call God.

I believe man does not have a divine nature.

 

[Audie]

I believe a good deal of science is made up and a good deal of religion is not.

That is a belief. Unevidenced belief.

 

[Muffled]

I will amend my statement.

Religion is about claiming a conclusion (God exists, God has words, a divine nature exists, souls exists, demons exist, thetans exist, etc.) and then only interpret experience through that lens, irrespective of any discriminating grounding in reality..

I believe experience is like that. Often we do not have a way of gelting to what something is if we have no previous knowledge. A person who runs across an aardvark might not know what it is but by googling it find out. It is the same thing with demons. A person without religious beliefs believes his mind has gone bonkers but a person with knowledge knows better and can handle it.

 

[Muffled]

That is a belief. Unevidenced belief.

I believe you believe what you want whether there is evidence or not.

 

[Audie]

I believe you believe what you want whether there is evidence or not.

I believe you believe what you want whether there is evidence or not.

Of course you just made that up, as you
have zero evidence that it is so.

Projecting your faults onto me is embarrassingly unsophisticated.

 

[ppp]

I believe experience is like that. Often we do not have a way of gelting to what something is if we have no previous knowledge. A person who runs across an aardvark might not know what it is but by googling it find out. It is the same thing with demons. A person without religious beliefs believes his mind has gone bonkers but a person with knowledge knows better and can handle it.

Not at all. There are ways to distinguish an imaginary aardvark from a real aardvark even if you have never heard or seen the word. There is no way of which I am aware to discriminate an imaginary demon from a real one.

 

[Nakosis]

Thats fine I respect that. But why is it "as opposed to science"?

Science is your "religion" and theism is the opposition?

Honestly, to fit it into the Religious Debate section.
I thought it'd get more attention here.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I will amend my statement.

Religion is about claiming a conclusion (God exists, God has words, a divine nature exists, souls exists, demons exist, thetans exist, etc.) and then only interpret experience through that lens, irrespective of any discriminating grounding in reality..

If you approach any field of human enquiry with that degree of contempt prior to investigation, in all likelihood you will succeed only in confirming your own prejudices. This is as true in the sciences as it is in religion or philosophy, the arts, or any other voyage of discovery to which man may apply his mind or soul.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I believe man does not have a divine nature.

Yet under your avatar it says, "Jesus in me".

 

[HonestJoe]

I believe science is the attempt to learn things by exploration and experiment as opposed to learning things by reading.

Written material can be a valid form of evidence (though it's evidential value and reliability can obviously vary).

I believe religion is not about learning things. It is about knowing God through His words. Some of that comes by books and some by experience.

Your religion might be about that but that doesn't describe religion in general. Some religions involve multiple gods while some none at all, and those which do can have very different ideas about their deity.

 

[ppp]

If you approach any field of human enquiry with that degree of contempt prior to investigation, in all likelihood you will succeed only in confirming your own prejudices.

With what degree of contempt are my you imagining? Because Christians routinely tell me the foundation of their religion is faith. That I am wrong for approaching the question intellectually or empirically. That I have to believe first in order to know that God exists. I hear this on TV, in All the churches that I have attended and on this site. I am just repeating what so many Christians tell me.

This is as true in the sciences as it is in religion or philosophy, the arts, or any other voyage of discovery to which man may apply his mind or soul.

That is an interesting claim. Do you have any evidence, intellectual or empirical, that methodology of science is to put the conclusion first and work to coerce the data fit that conclusion?

 

[Audie]

If you approach any field of human enquiry with that degree of contempt prior to investigation, in all likelihood you will succeed only in confirming your own prejudices. This is as true in the sciences as it is in religion or philosophy, the arts, or any other voyage of discovery to which man may apply his mind or soul.

If an accurate description reads like contempt,
what does that tell you? : D

 

[Audie]

With what degree of contempt are my you imagining? Because Christians routinely tell me the foundation of their religion is faith. That I am wrong for approaching the question intellectually or empirically. That I have to believe first in order to know that God exists. I hear this on TV, in All the churches that I have attended and on this site. I am just repeating what so many Christians tell me.


That is an interesting claim. Do you have any evidence, intellectual or empirical, that methodology of science is to put the conclusion first and work to coerce the data fit that conclusion?

Honestly, all these people with zero
training in science who know so much
about it.

 

[metis]

As opposed to religion?

Objectivity.

 

[ppp]

Honestly, all these people with zero
training in science who know so much
about it.

Of course. Apologetics classes are well known for accurate and honest descriptions of the scientific method.

 

[Audie]

Of course. Apologetics classes are well known for accurate and honest descriptions of the scientific method.

Ah so desu ka...
They are not just making things up!

They let some else do the dirty work,
and make things up for them!

 

[ppp]

Ah so desu ka...
They are not just making things up!

They let some else do the dirty work,
and make things up for them!

I practically know the scripts by heart, myself.

 

[ppp]

Yet under your avatar it says, "Jesus in me".

Only in the Biblical sense.