If you think about Occam's razor,(which is a scientific theroy) that theroy completely disproves religion because maybe god was just created to answer all questions that are unanswerable, or at least satisfy our curioisities. (what I just said is the simplest explanation)
But on the other hand religion, if it is true (which i believe it is) would completely demolish Occam's razor.
I just wanted to know your thoughts because im going through a philoshpy puzzle right now.
P.S. This is not a yes or no question, if you answer it as one please state what you suppose we do with either science or religion, because, much like a country, a society divided against itself (Science being one half, Religion being the other) cannot stand.
2006-09-30 18:55:04 · 13 answers · asked by mare0705 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
To begin with, religion is not Superman... :-)
Anyway, you just cannot put religion and science at the same level. That's the mistake. You cannot put both to the same struggle, or to discuss with each other. That would be just as ridiculous as a rugby team playing against a basketball team (each of them according to each one's own rules).
Religion and science do not complement each other. That's what religious leaders started to say when they realised their biggest efforts to destroy science had failed. They couldn't beat science, so they tried to step up to its level. But they are not the same. They are incompatible, since one will accept things on faith, while the other will require demonstration for everything. Religions want all answers and they want them now, like a child. Science can wait, and will take only what can be proved, like an adult.
What I say (though I'm not from your country) is we give each one their own place. Science is science. Religion is a belief, an elaborate form of a mythology or superstition. No scorn meant here. Though an unbeliever, I have the greatest respect for many believers, and I don't look down on them.
But science doesn't cancel an experiment, just because it's Friday 13th, and a black cat has just pushed us under a ladder.
2006-09-30 19:06:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Kent Hovind? The man isn't even a real doctor of anything: His "PhD" is from a diploma mill and his "Doctrate thesis" is (inlike all others) unavailable for public view. The man is a fraud and a bad joke.
Creationscience isn't any better. They don't do any real research, they just try to come up with half-baked ideas about why their Bible claims one thing and science shows something different. There is no science in their methods: They start with a foregone conclusion and try to shoehorn (or even outright manufacture) "evidence" that is supposed to support it. As opposed to real science which looks at the facts and draws conclusions from it.
2006-09-30 19:12:09 · answer #2 · answered by Scott M 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science is limited to what we can observe. Since God created us, it would make sense that he could create us lacking the ability to observe him directly. So science may not be the best method for proving the existence of God. Also, what disproves most scientific theories is more science. So science is kryptonite to bad science. Except that some people will not accept the facts.
2006-09-30 19:01:53 · answer #3 · answered by unicorn 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
it rather is a pity that this happens. each and every physique has a great to their ideals without intolerance, i'm sorry you have had undesirable stories. Your question .... according to probability it rather is because of the fact some Christians are susceptible to evangelise slightly, and prefer to attempt to transform each and every physique else. Missionaries attempting to transform something of the international, and so on. this would not ensue with the different faith interior the international. according to probability it irritates some people who do not prefer to be switched over, so they turn against Christianity oftentimes.
2016-10-15 09:43:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Indeed - remember all of those Greek and Roman Gods, and the Mayan Sun Gods? Come on, they had a god to explain every little thing - when the moon eclipses' the sun for example, they blame the gods for punishing them.
I think that is exactly what religion is. People forget that the bible, the Koran, and every other holy writing was written by human hand.
2006-09-30 18:58:35 · answer #5 · answered by Fun and Games 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Not at all. Science supports Creationism and the Bible. Go to drdino.com or creationevidence.org I am seeing Dr. Kent Hovind in Waukesha, Wisconsin on Oct. 7th. I enjoy watching him on TV and I am really looking forward to seeing him in person. He has wagered $10,000.00 against any evolutionist who can win a debate with him. He has never lost!
2006-09-30 19:02:07 · answer #6 · answered by Apostle Jeff 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Occam's razor is not a theory. It's simply the principle of parsimony. We live by it in most regards, so it ammounts to special pleading to reject it in other regards.
If you reject it just for religion, you should answer to yourself why you have done that.
2006-09-30 18:58:38 · answer #7 · answered by lenny 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Not at all. If one has total faith and trust in God then there is really no conflict. Anytime science appears to conflict with the Word of God we just have to understand that to date the limitations of our human knowledge have not lead us to the correct interpretation of the scientific findings we have.
2006-09-30 18:59:38 · answer #8 · answered by yagman 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
some say that Science's purpose is to explain How. and that Religion's purpose is to explain Why.
if you look at it that way, then the two get along much better.
2006-09-30 19:06:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The silliest thing about all this is that science cannot disproove the existance of God. Instead, all science can hope to do is explain how things work.
2006-09-30 18:59:22 · answer #10 · answered by Lord_of_Armenia 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋