What makes the scientific method different from philosophy and religion as a path to truth?

Question

help!! i dont know and cant find the answer anywhere!

Answer 1

Religions begin with someone's attempt to explain life and the universe, probably with a good bit of off-the-cuff speculation. Someone with ambition hears the explanation and decides to preach it, embellishing it with promises of rewards for belief and punishments for unbelief. What started as speculation becomes a dogma-for-profit when it acquires a priesthood.

In the process of becoming religious dogma, the original speculation is doctored primarily for propagandistic effectiveness. It is never checked for truth. Never. Not in thousands of years. Claims to the effect that the religious dogma has been tested, and that it has passed the tests, are lies.

Philosophy checks itself for logical consistency, and, insofar as it is blindingly obvious, with consistency with the phenomenal world. But philosophy is primarily about reasoning, not about gathering evidence and doing experimental tests. Lots of philosophical systems are possible, each of them internally valid; however, they're often inconsistent with the real world.

Science uses reasoning, but experiment is primary. Science is empirical where philosophy is abstract. Science appeals to nature, philosophy to logic, as the final arbitrator of truth.

Answer 2

Religion just takes everything in faith. It does not question anything, and if something does not agree with the religious standards, it is considered heretical. In past centuries, people were burned or tortured by priests and religious institutions just for saying that the Earth rotates and orbits around the Sun! Religion does not use the scientific method.

Science asks questions, tries to find answers by proving the theories it constructs. The scientific method goes like this:
a) Observation is the first step.
b) Make a hypotheses to try and explain your observations
c) Test the hypotheses by making experiments (where possible), gathering data by more observation.
d) Analyze the data gathered and see if it fits with you hypotheses. If the analysis does not fit, then you need to consider your hypotheses again and change it, and repeat the process.
Even when this process is finished and a scientific theory is born, this is just the beginning. Science always questions, and questions even theories that are well established. New facts and data can at any moment change theories, or even replace them with new theories.

Philosophy is different. It uses parts of science to ask and analyze questions, but the questions it asks have to do with the inner parts of humanity. It has to do with ethics and morality; with existence and logic and much more. The first philosophers like Plato and Aristotle were also scientists; there are a number of philosophers of science.

Answer 3

by scientific method, I assume you mean science. with that said, science is a rational system which is based on our intuitive knowledge of cause and effect. It is a method where we can produce the same result(effect) given a certain change(cause), over and over again until the end of time.

philosophy, contrary to your view, also follows such a rational method to produce knowledge or truth. but since philosophy deals with concepts rather than data, one persons "truth" may not be the same "truth" for another.

being as humans are, the religious path to truth is at times dangerous, as we are easily moved by subtle words and believe in what we want to believe. the religious path is the most irrational. in reality, there is no tolerance in any religion, except maybe Buddism. all religions say they are the "truth".

truth? what is truth? is there an answer?

dont ask "what is truth?", rather ask yourself, "why do I seek truth?"

that will be your truth.

Answer 4

The scientific method differs from philosophy and religion as a path to truth in that it leads to a set of parameters that are repeatable and verifiable. Science removes the human element from the equation, for the most part. Opinion is replaced with quantifiable truths.

Answer 5

A scientific theory is falsifiable. An idea put forward by science can be PROVEN to be wrong. It is then tossed aside. This makes way for a better, more improved idea to take its place. An new idea closer to the truth. So maybe the scientific method is kind of like evolution (survival of the fittest)?

Religion and philosophy are not falsifiable.

Answer 6

The scientific method can lead you to the door, but cannot let you in. You see, the scientific method can explain nearly everything scientifically in the Universe, but it cannot explain the very beginning, and this is where religion and philosophy come into their own. They offer theories which try to solve how or who created the Universe from the very beginning, and then scientific method takes over to explain the daily running of everything else. In reality, you need both the scientific method and religion to completely understand the whole evolution of the Universe from the very beginning to its present stage !

Answer 7

The above are correct about the testability of the scientific method. The biggest difference from philosophy and religion is that it is possible to show whether a scientific theory is true or false. Philosophy on the other hand depends on your point of view and religion can only be found to be true or false after death.

Answer 8

1.Science postulates a theory and does not claim to be absolute truth. It always defines the boundary conditions at which the theory is valid.
2. It never arrogates itself that everyone should accept. In fact it opens itself for close scrutiny by experts.
3. Science demands proof beyond doubt and no surmises are tolerated. The proof should not only be proved by experiments but also be repeatable.
4. There can not be any commandments in science and nobody can be accused of blasphemy if confronted by another theory.
5. Mathematics and physical laws do not change with region , religion, cast, creed or race.
6.Science is humble to accept the flaw if found out correct itself and always looking forward to update the knowledge to unravel the GREAT TRUTH.

Answer 9

Two things. The first is the kind of questions these methods of inquire ask. Although its an oversimplification, philosophy and religion ask about things like "what is good/evil?" "why are we here--what is our purpose" "is there a God" "how should we live and treat one another?"

Science aks about--and only about--things that can be measured, observed, tested, and verified. It sues "scientific method"--observation, logic, and tests--to do this.

That brings us to the second difference. Philosophy not only asks different questions, it must use different methods. Logic is a crucial component--but the philosopher--or the theologian--cannot start with observed facts (he/she cannot "observe" a ting that refers to our purpose in life") and must start from a premise that seems reasonable-and use logic to explore the implications of that premise. But there is no way to "test" the philosophical/religious arguement empirically as there is for observations of the physical universe.

Answer 10

They all start with theories of what the truth is but, the scientific method tests their theories. If you can't reproduce the effect then, it wasn't real just an idea / drug induced / concept that didn't pan out.