http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/images/Science_verses_faith_flowcharts.jpg
What do you think?
2007-12-30 16:26:38 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I think that is the typical ignorant, bigoted view of religion.
2007-12-30 16:44:22 · answer #1 · answered by beowulfs_kinsman 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who told you that this is an "either-or" thing? Science and religion can co-exist just fine so long as you don't try to use one to do the job of the other. Science is a study of the objective world, using the steps of the scientific method. It's not made to answer vague and subjective questions like "What is the meaning of life?" or "How should I behave around this person?" That's what things like religion and philosophy for. >>Is God the answer? or social Darwinisim? What's the question? Social Darwinism is a philosophy from Herbert Spencer, not to be confused with biological evolution which is a science from Charles Darwin (and has since been expanded upon by other scientists). Regardless, NEITHER have anything to do with the existence or non-existence of deity. You really should read up on these topics before you keep creating false dichotomies to yourself.
2016-04-02 03:38:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science is not "vs" faith. Science and faith are the two great seekers of truth. True science can never conflict with true faith, since truth cannot conflict with truth. Unfortunately there is a great deal of untrue faith out there, as evidenced by the fact that the beliefs of each denomination conflict with those of the others.
2007-12-30 16:44:07 · answer #3 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nice diagram. Faith doesn't have to work like that, but in a fundamentalist tradition it usually does. This is why I'm gnostic. Our tradition looks for experiential knowledge, not just faith. We continually question everything we believe and examine every motivation.
2007-12-30 16:38:42 · answer #4 · answered by Mark W 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What do you do when science keeps leading back to religion and keeps proving the very old religious beliefs that there is a creator? That life is too complex to have just happened even in its simplest form. That life cannot be duplicated by science?
2007-12-30 16:42:58 · answer #5 · answered by saintrose 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Science and faith go along naturally. It is religion that fears science.
2007-12-30 16:38:36 · answer #6 · answered by Mr. Speaker 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Most real science confirms the Bible. See here"
Then you quote the creationist museum. Hilarious
I'm sorry. Most real science is CONTRARY to the Bible. As well as archeology and historical records. And if those scientists had used to process of "faith" instead of the scientific method, they would have gotten nowhere
Bible = book of superstition. That's why you need a large dose of faith, because to take it as a non-religious person would be absolutely ridiculous
2007-12-30 16:34:39 · answer #7 · answered by Moo 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Lol. That's an awesome image. Points.
2007-12-30 16:33:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that anyone who cares enough to put what can just as easily, if not more easily, be communicated through words, into graph form, has a bit too much time on their hands.
2007-12-30 16:31:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think your graph is pointless drivel.
Those that believe such non-sense should also know that there lives, (according to the logical outcome of the graph), about "science" , are meaningless.
2007-12-30 16:41:41 · answer #10 · answered by jojo 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They forgot to add to the science part:
Politicize the theory and make everyone think that it's a fact.
2007-12-30 16:38:14 · answer #11 · answered by Christian Sinner 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋