2006-07-06 14:22:08 · 16 answers · asked by Dr. Z. 3 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Other - Science
In my opinion science is the clear winner.
The claims of science can be tested to see if they are right or not. If you don't mind doing a lot of work you can test some of those claims yourself and see if they are true. Most people just read what other people have done. There are always a few other scientists that are interested in the same stuff and will test it and also write about what they find. If it was true they will say so. If they couldn't get the test to work they will say that too. Whenever that happens that usually gets more scientists interested and they also try to test it. If nobody else can get it to work then most scientists will decide it was bogus. That is exactly what happened with cold fusion, which is now considered to be fake. Scientists have shorthand name for this process. It is called falsifiability, it means for something to be scientific it has to be possible to test it and prove that it is false if it is not actually true. It is the main thing that makes science different than religion.
The claims of religion cannot be tested so we don't have any way to know if they are right or not.
2006-07-06 14:42:00 · answer #1 · answered by Engineer 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Both! Although I'm an absolute science lover (read my other posts), I believe this question is a false choice. Neither one is more "believable" than the other.
The very concept of "belief" is different in the two modes of thought:
"Belief" in religion is synonymous with "faith." As such, it can be a more complete and unshakable kind of belief. Once you truly 'believe', there are *very* few things that can shake it.
"Belief" in science is always contingent. This means that a good scientist never truly believes anything 100% ... every fact, every theory, can be questioned, reexamined, and in some case discarded if new evidence or a better theory comes along.
Both modes of "belief" have their strengths and weaknesses. Religious faith has the advantage of being really supportive in moments of doubt, it brings a strength of conviction. For that reason it is a great foundation for issues of morality and personal guidance ... however, if held too rigidly and literally, it has no flexibility to accomodate new knowledge ... if held too literally, it leaves no room for new knowlege or growth.
Scientific belief has the advantage that, by accepting what it cannot know for certain, those things that it *does* explain can be believed with a high degree of confidence. Science is not threatened by new information, new knowledge ... in fact it is hungry for it! The disadvantage is that, as a contingent, ever flexible belief, it is not something you can base issues of morality and personal guidance.
A true human being needs to be able to master *both* forms of belief ... and to be able to hold both at the same time!
2006-07-06 14:59:54 · answer #2 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both, religion and science work together. God created everything, therefore fact is based on his creation. Evolution is not fact, it is speculation and falsification, most so called "evolutionary facts" were disproved over 100 years ago and the others more recently. Evolution after all is just another religion. All historical facts in the bible have been proven by archeologist's. An atheist scientist trying to disprove all religious text started with one book to another until he came to the bible and couldn't find one historical error, and calculated the chance of the bible not being true to be more than the law of gravity failing.
2006-07-06 14:56:16 · answer #3 · answered by firefly 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science tries to find truth to everything while current facts. Religion creates theories without manipulating any fact. So science is more believable.
2006-07-06 14:44:33 · answer #4 · answered by Science_Guy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on the question. Religion does not say a whole lot about how to make plastic or what soil is needed to grow corn, nor should it try to. When science presumes to make statements about the origins of life and of the universe, it takes such leaps of logic it may as well be religion.
Religion should not try to say things about science and science should know when it is treading on religion.
2006-07-06 14:40:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science is proof. We can not dispute the truth. But religion is humanities first attempts at creating laws and ethics. The world will always be a better place when we follow the laws and use ethics.
2006-07-06 14:40:20 · answer #6 · answered by Cynthia S 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science, of course. For many of the reasons listed already above. Simple fact over fiction. Religion being the ficton.
2006-07-06 14:39:29 · answer #7 · answered by isacoydog 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science = Fact and Theory based on Fact
Religion = based on faith, which by no means is derived from fact.
I will trust fact over faith for the reason that fact is more believable than faith. Therefore, science is more believable.
2006-07-06 14:28:04 · answer #8 · answered by NONAME 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anyone who believes in religion over science doesn't need vaccines, since being vaccinated against disease is based on evolutionary science.
2006-07-06 14:41:34 · answer #9 · answered by brooks163 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science, there is proof where as religion is just opinions and stories
2006-07-06 14:26:52 · answer #10 · answered by Lana 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋