Should science be considered a religion?

Question

If science is based on just fact.Impirical collected fact,that proves why the things occur? A scientific matter of fact.Then why is there big gaps.Where they have to conjecture to fill in a missing parts.Then they faith that it is true.Without complete fact.An if your belief system is based on that.Then wouldn't it be considered a religion?Plus it blows my that what we know is true now.Will soon to be disproven by someone else.I am not saying is crap.We have learned a lot of cool stuff.But is still a faith.
I do have a good question about the big bang theory.The universe expands and contracts.Where did the original matter come from?

Do you believe what know now,is more then what knew 1000 years ago?What about 500,250 or100 years ago?An what you believe now.How long will it be before will be considered foolishness?
This part was added.No one could the answer,in the lew of gaps we quess about the what should be,there lays the faith.

Answer 1

The only faith required for science is the belief that the physical universe is at least partially knowable. Where gaps are filled in by conjecture, scientists are busy trying to prove or disprove the conjectures - no one takes it on faith. The fact that science may see things differently next year makes it very different from religion, where any change in the dogma leads to accusations of heresy and other histrionics.

Science is also willing to admit it doesn't know everything, where religion expects you to accept it as absolute truth. Your understanding of science is very distorted; I hope you will manage to gain some education in that area.

Answer 2

Well, science is based on theories, which are, essentially, hypotheses which have stood up to repeated experiments or observation. There are pure conjectures (such as where did the original matter come from), but these are things that some day are likely to be proven or disproven (unless we blow ourselves up or something).
Things like God or the sacredness of the Bible are not provable, at least not empirically. There is no physical evidence that, for example, God exist. OK, we can say the Bible says so. Well, another book says God doesn't exist. Why should we choose the Bible over another book? This, incidentally, seem to be the kind of arguments that go on and on over in the Religion and Spirituality section.
As for the material of the Big Bang, there have been a lot of "theories", OK, conjectures. One involves the idea of us living on a "brane" (a type of spacial membrane) which bumps into another one nearby (in a larger dimension). This released the energy which caused the Big Bang, the matter coming from the energy (energy and matter are two forms of the same thing, per Einstein's Relativity).
Another thing we know is quantum mechanics. In it, it states that particles are "borrowed" from the space-time continuum itself. These particles (matter & anti-matter) almost immediately annhilate each other. Perhaps a great amount of this happened all at once at the Big Bang?

Answer 3

It can be, when carried to an extreme.

For example, to answer your question, there is no evidence about what started the big bang. So saying it was a higher power is as good as any other explanation, scientifically. Yet there are "new atheists" who are scientists who, without scientific evidence, insist that it was not a higher power. For them science is a religion, and they are fundamentalists.

My preference is to harmonize science and religion, which is perfectly possible. Science answers the questions that are answerable by scientific evidence, and does not give answers when that is not the case. That way science is not a religion, but a structured way of evaluating evidence.

Answer 4

No, science is not a religion. It doesn't rely on the supernatural; it is the opposite of a religion, actually. It relies only on natural causes and needs evidence to support it. Sure, we conjecture, but conjecture is based on evidence. As for where the matter came from - check back in about 10 years when the new particle accelerators come online and we can start testing the more theoretical of our theories. (The universe doesn't contract.)

Answer 5

Science is based on statistical reasoning, something is true only because it is true 99.99999999 percent of the time. Remember some of the most basic and fundemental equations in physics take advanced calculus to prove, a form of mathametics based on approaching limits and no absolutes.
Religion is based on the trial and error of human society and the observation of few insightful. They are really the rules or rather guidelines of successfully living with others in very large groups.
Here something to think about... you don't need to believe in gravity to have a very real effect on you, while your belief in an all mighty probably won't effect you at all especially if no one told you about an all mighty.

Answer 6

Science is based on repeatable, confirmable observation and deduction from that observation. The fact that we do not have a complete picture is irrelevant - it mereely says we have not completed the journey, not that we are reliant on dogma.

Religion is based on dogma and prejudice, often racial and other prejudice of the time the religious texts were written. It frequently disagrees profoundly with observable or even historical fact. Its texts often disagree even with themselves (the new testament, for example, contains two entirely incompatible versions of the fate of judas iscariot). Its hard to see how to see how anyone could take it seriously, let alone murder millions of people in its name as christians, muslims etc have done and continue to do.

Answer 7

I see your point, but I think that is does not compare to religion,because, religion is faith, believing with absence of evidence, but in science, it is proof, fact, and theories based on fact. These two topics, don't mix. The gaps are that it cannot be explained from proof, when you were saying there are big gaps in science.

Answer 8

There is no belief in science. Science is based on hypothesis, theory, and data.

Faith and belief are religious ideals and are not allowed in science.

Science is the removal of belief.

Answer 9

technology • noun a million the psychological and sensible activity encompassing the systematic learn of the form and habit of the particular and organic international via assertion and test. 2 a systematically organised physique of expertise on any project. in different words, no longer a faith

Answer 10

Religion-blind faith

Science-faith based on reason and observation