I'm just trying to understand the different creationist positions. Are there creationists who deny that the scientific method is valid? If so, why do they believe it is invalid?
2007-12-17 04:29:46 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Menon: Thanks for the response. For the record, I think the Quine-Duhem thesis provides an adequate solution to the problem of induction.
2007-12-17 04:40:06 · update #1
David Hume's problem of induction?
2007-12-17 04:32:28 · answer #1 · answered by Menon R 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Science and religion seem to clash.
Reasons why:
1. Science is limited to human interpretation. Humans are limited to 5 limited senses. That is we can't see all light, hear all sounds, and so on. Also, life outside human perception, in my mind, is so much broader.
2. Spirituality- I believe certain truths about the universe can be found through spirituality. How these truths are interpreted is almost always skewed. Also, most people make up “truths” and claim they have a spiritual origin. In addition, translation can cause false doctrine. Yet, in this world of change, I sometimes wonder if there can be a holy flawless doctrine.
3. There is always the case that Science and or Spirituality could be flawed. To this I say yes and no to both. Pure science is not flawed as pure spirituality is not flawed. Yet, if they were both pure then they wouldn’t be called science or spirituality; instead they both would become one and be called reality. Science has been shown to have weaknesses when big industry and money becomes entwined with it. I have seen rushed college students alter data in order to achieve the desired results in a timely manner. Also, everyone has seen large companies persuade "scientist" to alter or misinterpreted data in the interest of profit or to not get sued. Spirituality can be flawed by similar elements only in a different fashion. Politics have decided many religious arguments. Anytime spirituality is brought into this world of change it too becomes religion and begins changing. Many people become spiritual leaders not for search of truth and reality, but rather for fame, power, or other selfish reasons.
2007-12-17 12:49:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Alton Williams - astrophysicist at the George C. Marshall Space Flight Center of NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), Huntsville, Alabama had this to say on this subject.
In my years of doing scientific research, I have never encountered a conflict between a proved scientific fact and a teaching of the Bible. Often, seeming conflicts are caused by a lack of knowledge—either of a scientific teaching or of what the Bible really says. For example, some scientists and others erroneously think that the Bible teaches that plants, animals, and humans all developed on earth within six literal 24-hour days. This would be in conflict with known scientific facts. But the Bible does not teach that. Rather, it reveals that the creative “days” encompass thousands of years.
Confusion also arises from the mistaken idea that faith in God is merely an emotional experience. Far from that, faith in God and the Bible is based on facts that can be verified. As defined in the Bible, “faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration [or, “convincing evidence,” footnote] of realities though not beheld.” (Hebrews 11:1) Yes, faith is based on evidence. Hundreds of prophecies have been fulfilled in the past and in our day. Thus, even applying the scientific method used by all scientists to establish a scientific theory, we can have complete confidence in the fulfillment of Bible prophecies that pertain to future events.
2007-12-17 12:41:53 · answer #3 · answered by RubberSoul_61 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I should think all creationists have a problem with the scientific method. Applying normal scientific principles to creationism would destroy it in no time at all.
Have you checked out the Creation Museum's web site? If you're a fan of seriously twisted logic, look it up.
2007-12-17 12:42:10 · answer #4 · answered by auntb93 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
As the scientific method has resulted in a direct contradiction with the divine word of God, it must be flawed and therefore taking the time to actually gain even a rudimentary understanding of said method is considered a weakness of faith.
2007-12-17 12:39:07 · answer #5 · answered by lunatic 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think it is pretty obvious that all Creationists have a problem with the Scientific Method, and I doubt if they even understand the reason why that form of investigation is called that.
The whole position of Creationism is faith based, and that is the exact opposite of the method sciences follow.
2007-12-17 12:34:15 · answer #6 · answered by Buke 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, I'll try to find the link...........
Sorry, no luck. There was a person several weeks back that said the tools scientists use cannot be trusted because you must use science to prove scientific processes. He compared it to circular reasoning, like when people say all dating methods are wrong because they use the fossils to date the strata and then use the strata to date fossils. It all stems from misunderstanding/selective learning.
2007-12-17 12:32:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
You have to deny the scientific method to believe in the creation myths. When you stop asking questions and simply put some fairy tale character as the explanation, you are ignoring the scientific method.
2007-12-17 12:37:03 · answer #8 · answered by ibushido 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
There is no way to honestly understand the scientific method, believe it's valid, and still be a creationist. It's intellectually dishonest.
2007-12-17 12:37:34 · answer #9 · answered by rbc_commish 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Of course they have a problem with the scientific method--mainly because science proves the Bible is mere myth--not an ounce of proof to back up its young earth fairy tale.
2007-12-17 12:34:22 · answer #10 · answered by huffyb 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋