It seems to me that in recent years there has been a growing battle between religion and science. Time was the two disiplines kept their distance from each other in a agree to disagree fashion. Recently however religion has begun to instigate attacks on science .
Both are proposed explanations for one of the big questions that buzz around all of our heads from time to time. How did we get here? The problem comes when itelligent design which is no more than creationsm redressed as a pseudoscientific theory, is put to the test. To be a true scientific disipline you have hypotheses with testable variables. If your hypotheisis is "God created the world and everything in it" you can't prove or disprove it. Though as there is a lack of evidence to suggest the world was created by a supernatural being it should, at least for now, be shelved as a plausible answer.
Evolutionary theory on the other hand is really a theory by name only, It should be called evolutionary fact as more evidence for it grows by the day. While we may be still searching for missing links in our own species there are some good transitional chains in other, hopefully this link will explain more. species.http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/261/63/
Nobody could deny that evolution in bacterium, they change so rapidly that they are becomming immune to antibacterials which is causing problems like the hospital super bugs. There is also evidence that fish species are getting smaller as only larger specimins are harvested by man, the same applies to tusk growth in elephants, elephants are growing smaller tusks in response to the ivory trade.
Contrary to popular belief i ultimately have no problem with people believing what they like. I may believe they are wrong and even ignorant to believe such things but its their choice and i can't stop them. I am however bothered by the teaching in schools of Intelligent design as a) a science and b) As a plausible alternative to evolution. You can't teach something you have no real evidence for as a science, yet 89 schools in the UK do so and in the US that number is certainly higher.
Not content with teaching this in school there is also a "creation museum" http://www.creationmuseum.org/about in Kentucky in the US. This teaches that the earth is less than 10,000 years old and that man and dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time. You don't have to have a vast knowledge of science to realise that isn't true. They essentially believe that the book of Genesis should be taken completely literally even if it does contradict itself. Much of genesis including the creation myth has its orgins in Babalonian poetry and mythology so its not even as though it is orginal Judeo Christian belief. More about the beliefs of fundamental christians can be read here http://www.answersingenesis.org/
It worries me that irrational belief seems to be on the grow, i'm fairly sure there are other people on this forum that share my concerns.
I love Alcohol Induced Altruism(Laura) I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence - Doug McLeod Those who believe in absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
"It seems to me that in recent years there has been a growing battle between religion and science."
I can't be bothered to make a proper reply,because I've got revision to do,and I had an exam with pretty much the same argument in it yesterday,but it's not a recent thing,science vs religion,is it?
The Enlightenment?
"Watch with glittering eyes the whole world around you because the greatest secrets are always hidden in the most unlikely places. Those who don't believe in magic will never find it."
Time was the two disiplines kept their distance from each other in a agree to disagree fashion.
Kept their distance from each other perhaps, but there's no need for it to be in an 'agree to disagree' fashion. Contrary to popular belief, there need not be any conflict between science and religion. Time was science was investigated by religious people wanting to better understand God's creation.
Quote:
Recently however religion has begun to instigate attacks on science .
Well, religion hasn't been doing anything of the sort. Some religious people have. There's a big difference. And I hope you won't deny that some scientists have also been attacking religion; there's no need to pretend it's a one sided thing. And then, of course, there are those people who are perfectly able to accept both.
We're not all fundamentalist nutters who go on about how the world was created in 6 days 6,000 years ago and whatnot.
I'll come back when I'm less distracted, and possibly contribute something useful. But I'm tired of hearing the whole "science vs. religion" thing, when more accurately it should be "creationism vs. science".
Oh - and I'm not saying that I think intelligent design should be taught in science. There's no use in pretending that it's a science. But I also fail to see the point in acting like science is the only think worth learning about.
It's naive to place religion and science against each other. Both survive on entirely opposite concepts: one on logic and evidence; the other on a faith that exists despite the lack of logic and evidence. Neither is necessarily more vaild than the other, but two such contrasting sides will never find a compromise.
lol i can't work out which one is worse one says that the world is one way and one way only
and the other just cant seem to lives things alone
you have religous nut jobs telling people how to live
and science freak making new diseases and pumping mice full of drugs to see what it will do to us
last time i looked i didn't have a tail and pink eyes
i say F**k god and science
"It seems to me that in recent years there has been a growing battle between religion and science."
I can't be bothered to make a proper reply,because I've got revision to do,and I had an exam with pretty much the same argument in it yesterday,but it's not a recent thing,science vs religion,is it?
The Enlightenment?
Oh i'm not saying this is anything new its just become prevelent recently because of the whole Intelligent Design debacle
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesmerized.
Well, religion hasn't been doing anything of the sort. Some religious people have. There's a big difference. And I hope you won't deny that some scientists have also been attacking religion; there's no need to pretend it's a one sided thing. And then, of course, there are those people who are perfectly able to accept both.
We're not all fundamentalist nutters who go on about how the world was created in 6 days 6,000 years ago and whatnot.
Well no religion hasn't been attacking science because they are simply disciplines but Religious people have been attacking Scientific people. While i wont deny there have been flare ups from both sides, the scientific side has a stronger position because they use evidence and reason not mythology and faith. Its also ultimately a scientists job to question religion and hopefully one day disprove it. It is their job to question the world around us to understand it better, to question why people choose to believe blindly by faith even when all the evidence stacks up against them. Science asks questions to get answers, Religion feels it has the answer already and doesn't question it.
I realise not every religious person is a fundamentalist but it really is the fundamentalists i was getting at. Having said that to agree with something hikkiko said earlier I do wonder how modern christians for example can pick and choose what they believe out of the bible, surely if it truly is the word of God which is what your told it is. Then it is unquestionably the truth, why would he lie. So i'm never quite sure why if you believe it you don't believe all or nothing if you truly have faith.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewis The Second
It's naive to place religion and science against each other. Both survive on entirely opposite concepts: one on logic and evidence; the other on a faith that exists despite the lack of logic and evidence. Neither is necessarily more vaild than the other, but two such contrasting sides will never find a compromise.
I think its quite the opposite, religion and science in some ways are the same, or at least trying to solve the same questions. They are essentially fighting for the same battle ground. Before science there was only religion and it came to being as started to question our world and our place in it. As science has come along it has answered more and more, leaving religion with less to explain. The more we find out the less need we will have for it until eventually one day it at least in theory should dissapear all together.
I love Alcohol Induced Altruism(Laura) I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence - Doug McLeod Those who believe in absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
Science and religion aren't incompatible, they have existed side by side and have been intertwined in the past. There is nothing to say that being a scientist dictates you cannot be religious.
Some people also seem to think that by being religious it means you have no sense of logic, or even common sense. But that doesn't really follow. Faith and logic are not exclusive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithra
Having said that to agree with something hikkiko said earlier I do wonder how modern christians for example can pick and choose what they believe out of the bible, surely if it truly is the word of God which is what your told it is. Then it is unquestionably the truth, why would he lie. So i'm never quite sure why if you believe it you don't believe all or nothing if you truly have faith.
Unless you are a Creationist then you won't believe the Bible to be the literal word of God. To be a Christian is not to believe in everything the Bible says. You can be a very good Christian without ever opening the book. Religion is a deeply personal thing and it doesn't matter what the person does or does not believe as long as the core beliefs are there. Or even if it is the religion they feel like they identify with most.
While i wont deny there have been flare ups from both sides, the scientific side has a stronger position because they use evidence and reason not mythology and faith
Firstly, it really isn't a case of there being a 'religious side' and a 'scientific side'; religion and science are perfectly compatible. There are many scientists who are religious. Secondly, your understanding of religion and how it is justified is actually quite mistaken. It simply isn't the case that it's all about mythology and such. Of course it's faith, but believing in anything is faith. It isn't blind faith, it is - or should be - well-informed, educated faith. Have you actually opened a single book of religious apologetics? I suggest you try, and you will find that it really isn't a case of "you just have to have FAITH". I won't deny that there are those who think like that, but I believe they're in the minority.
Quote:
Religion feels it has the answer already and doesn't question it.
Again, simply not true. It does happen, but it isn't always the case. If nothing were ever questioned in religion, there would be no development, no deepening of understanding, no need for apologetics.
Quote:
I do wonder how modern christians for example can pick and choose what they believe out of the bible, surely if it truly is the word of God which is what your told it is
It isn't a case of 'picking and choosing' it's a case of the Bible needing interpretation. It would be naive to suggest that all of the Bible was ever meant to be historical fact. It just wasn't. There are many different genres in the Bible and you need to be aware of that before you start saying "oh look! This can't be literally true, I just disproved Christianity (and presumably Judaism)". Take the creation story of Genesis, for example, since you've already mentioned it. Most Christians and Jews wouldn't even think of suggesting that it's literally true, or that it was ever intended to be. The people who came up with it didn't know what the origin of the universe was like, how could they? It was simply the Hebrew creation story, most likely in response to other creation stories, like the Mesopotamian Enuma Elish. And yes, it would have drawn on other sources in order to explain what it was supposed to. Namely, that one God created everything out of nothing. Some of the Bible - particularly the Old Testament - is mythology. That doesn't mean it's a load of nonsense; it's a perfectly valid way of explaining some kind of truth. It's only when you try to take it literally that problems arise.
I'm not trying to convert you here; I just wanted to point out that it is not a case of religion vs. science. And fundamentalist evangelical types scare me.
I think as Carl Sagan said, "Science is not just compatible with spirituality - science is a profound source of spirituality."
I'm not a religious person and personally I think that religion has caused a lot more ills than it has or ever will solve. I think religion originated out of an attempt to understand the world we live in but without any scientific procedure or understanding and also out of a desire to comfort ourselves that there is something out there after we die and there is someone out there to look after us when things go wrong. However, whatever religious people do believe, the fact that those beliefs are not supported by modern science does not undermine them. If you prove something that you believe in then it no longer becomes faith, it becomes knowledge. If science were to prove that the world is actually only 10,000 years old for instance then there would be no need to believe it in the same way we don't believe the sky is blue - we just know it is. Faith is something that relies on lack of proof and as such is pretty much the opposite of science. Therefore, to market a faith as a legitimate scientific theory is ridiculous.
However, I do think there is a spiritual part to each of us. There is a part of us that yearns to feel somehow connected to some higher entity and to understand our own place in the universe. It is this part that drives some people to believe in a god/God or in astrology or in any other vague, fanciful or otherwise comforting yet scientifically unsound ideology. However, this spiritual part of us does still need to be satisfied. We all need to have our own faiths and belief systems. My god just doesn't happen to be a loving, all powerful creator. I believe in the law of gravity. I believe in the laws of mathematics. I believe that the world is an incredibly beautiful place that is far more complex and ingenious than we can fully grasp. But I don't feel this view is undermined by science. I don't think that the theory of evolution or the Big Bang theory in any way makes the world any less remarkable.
Going back to that quote at the start. I derive my spirituality from science and from proven, tested ideas. Whether that is any less valid as a belief system is a matter of personal opinion but whether it is more valid as a scientific principle to teach to children as a legitimate theory should not even be a debate.
it's not really a new debate. it's been around since the 16th centuary. becuase there were many plays written that reflected the rejection of the medieval model where God was the centre of everything, where as the Renaissance values for individualism and it was a pre-modern era, with growing secularism.
like someone above said, not everyone isna fundementalist. someone people accept both.
i for one am one of those people who accept both. im a muslim and believe the world was created in 6 AGES [not days]. it's all down to interpretation.
and i also believe people take religion too far. i don't think there is any religion in the world that tells people to create conflict. they are about peace. but there are extremeists in every 'group' within society.
you can get nutter scientist, and nutter faith people.
each to their own i say. :) keeps the world happy ;)
EDIT: untimatly, with science they strive for more and more knowledge. what happens when they run out of things to discover? sometimes i think that with this constant stive to have an answer for EVERYTHING will actually be the end of the human race. becuase it seems as though they won't be happy until they have an answer for everything?
dunno if that makes sense.
my two pennies worth though.
Last edited by privileged-outcast : 02-05-2008 at 04:52 PM.
Reason: adding
Can't be bothered to read all of that... but its my opinion that religion is there to answer questions in such a way that they're not explained... simply a social control to create a dis-incentive from committing crime and maintaining a standard of morales... from an age where law enforcment did not exist, and a standing army was too costly to maintain.
Science aims for objective answers which cannot be questioned!... leaving it up to the individual to create their own choices within the world. Contrary to Religion; science dictates what happens and not what to do!!!
Sometimes i wish humans werent as intelligent as they are because maybe then we wouldn't have this burning desire to know why we're here etcetc. However, we can't change it so we'll still try to explain it. I personally am not religious. I think it would be nice to have the blind faith that some people have but i think one of the reasons those people are like that it because thery're scared not to be. Scared of what happens when we die, scared of judgement say etc. I do believe that science has a lot more to offer when it comes to this argument. If religion explained everything then why would we still be asking questions?
Yes, but there aren't that many Christians who take that as literal fact. There are an awful lot more who see the Genesis story as a metaphor for what happened and there are plenty of Christians who believe that God is what started the big bang.
They're not meant to be definitive answers. Also, scientific research is as much as about interpretation than anything else, there are many conflicting arguments within the scientific community about everything ranging from Einstein's theories to what a pile of rocks are.
You can be a very good Christian without ever opening the book.
i disagree. to me, a christian believes in what Jesus did on the cross?how can you possibly even attempt to understand that if you've never read the bible?
with fundamentalisim etc i think in general there is a problem within western christianity that the bible is not a western book, the old testament in particular was written in hebrew in a culture very different from now (as i think has already been mentioned...?), so when people come in and take the bible in english at face value without a knowledge of the original language/culture it was written in i think they miss the point.
science/religion - i think that if religion (any) is true, then there shouldn't be anything in science that dissproves it. the two should work together.
sorry if i offend.
"Your smile is the most courageous thing I've seen"
i disagree. to me, a christian believes in what Jesus did on the cross?how can you possibly even attempt to understand that if you've never read the bible?
It would help if you had read the Bible but I don't believe it to be essential. You can learn from what other people say and how different people interpret things.
