Should knowledge of the universe come from irrational faith, or scientific evidence?

Question

religion derives its knowledge and explanations from a faith that non-believers see as irrational, while science has some kind of proof, and some reason behind the explanations.

Answer 1

The premise that believers derive knowledge from faith isn't true. In fact, it works the other way around. A believer derives his or her faith from facts. The Christian faith for example is grounded in the person of Jesus, who was a real person who lived on earth. There are very few historians who would dispute Jesus' existence, and most even accept that he was resurrected from the dead because of the overwhelming evidence. It is on these facts that the Christian faith rests. This too is not irrational, but quite reasonable. One, it was empirically observed. Two, it was well documented. Three, it has stood the test of scrutiny from skeptics and test of time. A rational person would accept such things as truth while an irrational person would reject them.

Additionally, invoking faith isn't irrational. Since you spoke of the universe, we can use that for an example. Most scientists accept that the universe came about as a result of a cosmic explosion billions of years ago, which means that the universe had to come from somewhere. If the universe had a start, then at one time it didn't exist. Now both believers and non believers think that it came from nothing so this leaves two choices: the universe had to either appear out of nothing or it was created out of nothing. Creation has causation, while the alternative does not, so creation would be more in line with rational thinking than irrational thinking.

Science and religion aren't two mutually exclusive paths for discovering knowledge. It is true that they exist in two different spheres, but these spheres overlap and often have to be reconciled. Rational people of faith don’t think they have all the answers. I admit there is a lot I don’t know, and I don’t think I will ever know. There is even a lot about theology I don’t know. But in some regards, I find faith more practical than I do science. I can’t use science to understand the relations I have with my friends and family. Faith is a lot more conducive to that, while science is more practical for discovering new solar systems, something faith doesn’t really apply to. But they both talk about the origins of life, the origins of the universe, and the final destiny of life and the universe. Here, they overlap greatly, and they have to be reconciled accordingly.

Answer 2

Talk about a tough question... I don't believe that it is or the one or the other, first of all. On one hand, scientific history has already proven that there is a big amount of 'rationalism' in the way the universe is constructed. I don't mean intelligent design or something like that, it's just that it's possible to find a (mathematical) logic in the composition of the universe. So scientific evidence will always play a very important role if we want to know it, it has to. Scientists for the sake of science would stop there and say "well, we've calculated that this and this process started then and functions this way so now we get it" and get on to another problem. However, in my opinion, one should not neglect the philosophical consequences of the results of scientific research. Of course, philosophy isn't irrational (it's the use of logic on unmathematical, instincive questions), but it adds a moral or metaphysical dimension to an otherwise purely rational discussion. As both pure scientific ratio and instinctive philosophy are basic parts of human nature, I believe we should use both in our wanting to understand the universe.
As for irrational faith, that's another question. You can use as much science or philosophy as you want, you always come to a question where not even the beginning of a philosophical explanation is possible : "Who started all this?" The answer cannot be obtained, for the simple reason that man has not the intellectual possibilities to find it out (just as you will never be able to teach quantum physics to your pet dog). I think that here, every man should choose for himself : or turn to an irrational, but maybe very inspiring faith, or accept the apparent absurdity of his existence and get his drive to live from the indignation that is the result of it. But whatever you do, irrational faith will never lead to knowledge, as "knowledge" implies a waterproof logic.

Answer 3

What good is knowledge of the universe at all? We live here. Why explore the universe? What are you looking for? A different place to live? More life? I'm just missing the point I guess.

Science does have "some kind of proof" but it's not any better and far colder than the proof of God. Science is good at answering IF/THEN scenarios. It doesn't tell us where we came from. It has theories that are just as faith based as any religious belief, so what's the difference?

Again, I think I'm missing your point.

Answer 4

That evolution has handed off is an basic actuality revealed with the help of geology, chemistry, paleontology, nuclear physics, astronomy, molecular biology, genetics, comparative anatomy and various different disciplines. the thought of evolution is is a style of the mechanisms with the help of which evolution has proceeded. No, evolution does not violate scientific 'rules'. Evolution does not violate any regulation of thermodynamics. every person who makes use of the words chaos, order or entropy at an identical time as speaking approximately thermodynamics does not actual comprehend something relating to the difficulty. i ought to furnish you an occasion of order coming from chaos which you would be able to show on a counter-good. Rock candy, ever made any? The chaotic motions of the sugar molecules and the water molecules they're dissolved in provide upward push to ordered crystalline structures with the aid of fact the water evaporates. Why? with the aid of fact atoms and molecules exert alluring and repulsive forces on one yet another and can purely bond in a finite variety of techniques. i've got by no skill heard of evolution violating the regulation of gravity, care to difficult?

Answer 5

Your understanding of religion sucks. Must be you derive your understanding of religion from an irrational faith in scientific evidence.

People of faith do NOT derive their knowledge and explanations from your above description. Perhaps you should spend some time with a person of faith, preferably a scientist, before you make such asinine comments about us.

Answer 6

Actually the only faith that is irrational is one that is not founded in some kind of evidence.

1) Believers believe because they have had some kind of experience or seen some kind of evidence that gives them a reason to beleive. This is rational.

2) Agnostics don't know what to believe because they don't feel they have enough evidence either way. This is rational.

3) Atheists claim that God doesn't exist because they don't have enough evidence either way. This is IRrational.

See? The only belief system that is truly "irrational" is atheism.

Answer 7

Knowledge of the universe should come from evidence.
What most people fail to appreciate is faith involves evidence.
What most people have is BLIND faith and its not worth diddly squat!
Hebrews 11:1 gives a definition of faith.
The word 'evidence' is part of that definition.
Romans 10:17 says faith FOLLOWS the thing heard.
So one must 'hear', that is do research, study, prove things to oneself.
Upon such activity real faith is built up.

Answer 8

Faith should not be blind. You must use your intelligence to understand that there are some things which science cannot explore and explain by their imperfect instruments. For example, God is unlimited. How can we know Him by our limited minds and senses? We can only know Him by His mercy.
There are many scientific proofs that perfect knowledge can be attained from authorized scriptures. You must come to this conclusion by your intelligence. And when you are fully convinced that authorized scriptures can give you valid information, then you can get knowledge directly from the scriptures. Such faith is not blind or irrational, but it is very intelligent and scientific.

Answer 9

Even scientific evidence needs interpretations. Every belief system has axioms, things it assumes to be true without proof. If science is going to get anything done, we have to assume that the principles guiding the universe won't change arbitrarily. Although, if they do, it doesn't mean all of science has been a waste, we simply need to accept that maybe God is above those principles and can walk on water, or create from nothing if He wants to.

Answer 10

if you search hard enough...

you can either prove your "irrational" faith wrong
or you can prove it right...

& that goes the same way for science...
we have already seen lots of "scientific" theories
that were at one time regarded as a right
but were proven wrong...

ask a physicist or a cosmologist
& ask them to prove any theory on how the universe
came about... they most likely cannot...

& thats after they have devouted their whole lives
in pursuit of that particulat discipline...

although some of them after looking at the mind bloggling requirements for you,me, everything else & our whole planet to survive and sustain life...
they now argue that there must be some sort of a Creator--
which irrational believers know as God