2007-11-11 12:16:49 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Hardly. People who understand and appreciate science are the most skeptical of all. In order to persuade a scientific thinking person, you must offer reasonable evidence, or at the very least a logically framed hypothesis that can be tested.
Religioius/spiritual believers are not willing to use questions or doubt. If they did, their illusions would crumble.
2007-11-11 12:27:14 · answer #1 · answered by kwxilvr 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Credulity can inflict both the religious and the scientifically minded person, but when it comes to overall gullibility, it is those people who choose religious dogma over scientific fact, that are truly impressionable.
Science encourages peer reviewing, verification of evidence, and independent corroboration. You don’t have to take Newton’s theories of gravitation on the basis of authority; you are free to test them yourself. You are not limited to merely trusting that quantum mechanics is deducible from the nature of the cosmos; you can study the principles of physics and arrive at this conclusion yourself.
It is only in religious discourse, where it is both encouraged and mandated, that certain propositions be accepted, which cannot be proven, on the basis of authority. Where science goes by the creed that “something is true, because it is proven true, and you can check it out for yourself”, religion’s mantra is it is true “because we said so, or some figure from antiquity said so”.
Religion is the force that elevates naiveté and blind acceptance of propositions as a virtue. In science, such gullibility is reviled.
2007-11-11 20:49:27 · answer #2 · answered by Lawrence Louis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on what you already believe.
People who believe in science think people who believe in religion are too impressionable. People who believe in religion think those who believe in science are too impressionable.
Contrary to popular belief, religion and science are not polar opposites. Both are strategies used by man to attempt to explain the universe.
2007-11-11 20:28:35 · answer #3 · answered by Matt 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah maybe they read too many science books, instead of believing the Bible, you know, like Joshua stopped the sun and stuff like that.
Moses turned his rod into a snake that ate Pharoah's servants' snakes, so he had no need for science.
2007-11-11 20:22:29 · answer #4 · answered by Saint Nearly 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You need facts to back up the science.
2007-11-11 20:22:00 · answer #5 · answered by punch 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, and also if people would read the entire Bible as written they would see there is no conflict between the two.
2007-11-11 20:24:34 · answer #6 · answered by paula r 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yeh...Science is too new to use as your ONLY explanation for how things work and why they work. I'd suggest an amalgam of both, to be safe.
2007-11-11 20:20:02 · answer #7 · answered by Maddy 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think the opposite is true.
2007-11-11 20:20:19 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
LMAO!!!! I believe facts, all you have is faith. I think you've got it backwards.
2007-11-11 20:19:38 · answer #9 · answered by Emily 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
NO NOTHING TO INTER RELATE
2007-11-11 21:56:04 · answer #10 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋