Anyone agree with me on this? Agnostics make the best scientists?

Question

The reason I believe agnosticism is what scientists should beleive in is because it fits more appropriatly to the scientific method. This is because unlike religion or athiesm, agnosticism keeps the existance or non-existance of god in quesion unlike athiesm or religion which jumps to conclusion about gods existance or non-existance. Therefore it opens the minds of scientists to accept discoveries that may lead to a paradigm shifts without the interference of personal bias. Anyone agree?

That way it would leave from for the question of god to be up to expermental determination rather then political and social bias.

You hit the nail right in the head kitten and moose. Agnosticism keeps personal bias out of the scientific methods and lets empirical findings determine how our universe may run (weather it is god that runs it or not) rather then strait out assuming that god exists or does not exist without experimental evidence to support it.

Answer 1

Well, yes. Science itself is technically agnostic. By limiting one's self to empirical findings, one forgoes any metaphysical discourse concerning the nature of what one is studying.

Answer 2

No.

Have you ever wondered why western civilization has been so scientifically superior for so long?

Some of the greatest minds in scientific history were Christians. Francis Bacon (the father of the scientific theory), Isaac Newton, Nicolas Copernicus, Gallileo Galilei, Johannes Kepler, Pascal, Rober Boyle, Michael Faraday, Samuel Morse, Louis Pasteur...

And this is by no means a complete list. These men were driven by the belief that the universe was created by a benevolent God, and that, therefore, it would be governed by orderly mathematical principles, and their predictions were correct.

That doesn't mean that only Christians can be scientists, or that the best scientists are all Christians, only that belief in God doesn't produce any stronger bias than a belief that we cannot know if there is a God or that there is no God.

I will go as far as to say that without Christianity science wouldn't exist. Today atheist scientists build off of the foundation of Christian scientist even as they accuse Christians of ruining scientific progress.

We all start with an assumption of some kind, and that assumption will inevitably effect how we interpret scientific findings. This is what causes evolutionists to continue studying evolution despite being faced by contrary evidence time and time again. For instance, when evolutionists discovered the Cambrian Explosion, rather than saying, "Well, maybe we should re-think our theory." They said "There MUST be an explanation for this!"

Answer 3

No, I think the best scientists are the ones who know how science works, and know how to separate their own personal spiritual path from their work and research.

Besides, how often does a scientist's personal belief, disbelief, or ambiguity about God's existence REALLY affect their research? Are there really, say, chemists working on a new plastic polymer for CD cases whose work gets affected by personal beliefs like this?

Answer 4

I can still question things and believe in God, if I follow where the results lead.

Answer 5

I don't agree. I think anyone could be a good scientist if they don't let beliefs/lack of get in the way of your work.

Answer 6

No. Anybody is qualified to be a scientist provided they are capable of setting up neutral conditions for their experiments.

Answer 7

Actually, I think anyone can be a good scientist, provided they keep their pre- conceived biases separate from their work.

Answer 8

Correct. A god has been neither proven nor disproved and can't be.

Answer 9

Disagree....here is why.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html