Science is based on mathematics. mathematics is based on belief (e.g. "any point external to a straight determines a single parallel to the given line", still unproven, that's why they call it an axiom). Why is this different from religion? I'd like to hear from both believers and non-believers.
And PLEASE do your homework, the answers to my Lucifer question were very dissapointing. the only biblical mention of Lucifer was a Vulgata mistranlation of Ezechiel.
And please don't say "effects and postulates", dear atheists, Christians have been saying this all along and if you didn't take it as a valid argument, why should I?
2007-04-03 13:19:08 · 9 answers · asked by Gungnir 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I agree with where you are headed, but not your line of argument. Not all empirical science is based in mathematics, as if deduced by axioms. Rather, mathematics can be used to create models that interpret nature.
2007-04-03 13:27:45 · answer #1 · answered by Aspurtaime Dog Sneeze 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All belief is based on axioms, yes. The difference between (if you like) religious and non-religious axioms is that the non-religious ones seem to give us results. The law of non-contradiction is axiomatic (can never be proven or disproven) but when we rely on it, things work, spacecraft get where they're supposed to go, computers work and so on.
I have another axiom, which I'm sure no sane person would dispute: That the order and complexity that we see around us in the natural universe, and particularly in the intricate structure and functions of living organisms, could not possibly just exist fully formed, with no cause, no origin, no precursor of any sort. I can't *prove* that this is the case, but it seems inconceivable to me that anyone would dispute it.
So, the logical consequence of accepting this axiom is that, for the very same reason, it's not possible that the order and complexity of the universe is sourced in an intelligent deity who designed and made the universe and *himself* exists fully formed with no cause, no origin, no precursor of any sort. I don't think any reasonable person would dispute the axiom presented here, and acceptance of the axiom leads to an indisputable proof of the non-existence of an intelligent creator.
Anyone who (against all reason) asserted that the order and complexity we see in the universe *could* indeed exist fully formed with no cause and no origin, in order thereby to save the concept of an uncaused intelligent designer, would find that they had invalidated said designer by making him redundant - i.e. if the order and complexity of the universe could just exist fully formed and uncaused then it would not need (in fact, could not possibly have) a designer.
Either way, the concept of a creator is invalidated.
2007-04-03 20:24:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Science is not based on math. Science is based on Empiricism. Math is a form of analytical reasoning. Empiricism is a school of philosophical thought that says that the only synthetic (not analytic) knowledge we can have is derived from sense experience.
In other words, science is based on observation of the phyisical world, not on logic or math. It uses these things as tools to help make sense of the data, but they are no more than tools.
Math is based on one single principle, A=A. EVERYTHING is derived from that. It doesnt' take a whole lot of faith to believe that 1=1 and 2=2 etc are always true. In fact, it takes no faith at all.
2007-04-03 20:25:26 · answer #3 · answered by Skippy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am not quite sure where you come up with the phrase 'mathematics is based on belief'. I beg to differ. It is simply a tool used to describe measurements and properties using numbers and symbols. There is no belief involved. An inch is an inch. I do not have to believe in it. It is a unit of measurement created in order to measure a things length.
2007-04-03 20:34:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Mathematics is analytical and provable by a series of formula.
So your basic premise is false
Mathematics is not based on "belief" but on repeatable concrete fact. There may be some theorem in Mathematics, but they are presented only as possible ideas...not fact.
2007-04-03 20:29:28 · answer #5 · answered by Eartha Q 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science is not based on mathematics, it is based on repeatable and controlled observation, verified and analyzed.
2007-04-03 20:27:33 · answer #6 · answered by Freethinking Liberal 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Science is not based on mathematics. Sort of kills it stone dead really.
2007-04-03 20:22:20 · answer #7 · answered by fourmorebeers 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Remove yourself from your self appointed soap box.
2007-04-03 20:22:36 · answer #8 · answered by awayforabit 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think I'll skip your class today.
god bless
2007-04-03 20:25:28 · answer #9 · answered by happy pilgrim 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋