Quote:
Originally Posted by
gugi
me, me me - physicist, it's two letters difference and that 'c' is actually pronounced as 's', the first 's' is pronounced 'z' and the last 's' is pronounced 's'. I always knew English makes perfect sense :)
Thanks, no matter how muuch I write/speak it....sometimes I just can't grasp it right...probable because I already speak Dutch, German, a little french and I'm learning spanish...I wonder if I start mixing them up.
Quote:
I disagree, experimental physics doesn't make any difference, nobody is capable of repeating every single experiment. But if that's the defining criterion, you'll have to go all the way to defining an 'observation' and then you don't really fare any better, as you'll have a philosophical problem.
That's what I've been saying. Thus believing that you have a possible explanation and acting upon that explanation requires faith. As you cannot possible with 100% certainty confirm that you are right. There will always be the tiniest granule of doubt....which is the part that faith bridges.
Quote:
But I think you're setting up a false comparison, based on poor criterion.
In my opinion the qualitative difference between science and religion is that religion has immutable postulates, while in science nothing is sacred and everything must be constantly challenged, reverified, refuted and reestablished. But at any given moment in science there are postulates or axioms that everything is based on, just not the 'rock solid foundation' that a religion is supposed to have, and that's what paradoxically gives science its strength. It's not 'facts' that must be taken by faith, but a process of improvement to our understanding. And the only advantage it has is that it has demonstrated to be more effective and efficient than anything else.
Everything has to be taken by faith, be it facts, a process, or someone's intentions.
Interesting. Small change however. I'll make a small correction to illustrate my point.
Quote:
The qualitative difference between science and religion SHOULD BE that MOST religionS haVE SOME immutable postulates, while in science nothing SHOULD BE sacred and everything must be constantly challenged, reverified, refuted and reestablished.
What you're displaying here is the ideal of science whilst at the same time you're looking at the reality of MOST religions. So your comparison is slanted as well.
You see, as you're right that science SHOULD BE gradual improvement. In general that isn't the face it presents to the world.
In that same breath....those things covered by religion that are alsso covered by science are no more than a smaller footnote in religion (creation etc)....whilst things featured in science that are also covered in religion (such as morality, the path to happiness etc) are but a mere footnote in science.
I agree that in science the goal is gradual increase towards truth. However that is not the way the scientific community present's it's face to the "non enlightened". Things are presented as scientific FACTS, not the "working theories that we at this moment take to be true because everything we've seen so far says so".
At the same time SOME religions/religionists focus completely on those things that should not be important to them.
God wouldn't care if you were misstaken about the creation happening the way you think it did. However he WOULD care about the way you treated those that don't agree with you.
And so the major part of the "advocates of science" focus on those things that play only a minor role in religion and because of that proclaim it to be bogus and of no worth.
However you take it though. Whenever you take something that has not bee proven to you personally and apply it....that requires faith. Be it in the person that taught you, or a concept that you believe came from God....be it a commandment that came from your wife/dog/sacred toast with the virgin mary in it.
Faith is not a concept that is part of religion alone. It's the acting on something that you believe and trust to be true. And when/if/ proof comes...your faith in that person/concept/company/God/toast increases and you're more likely to act on that/them the next time.
Once again, I'm not saying science and religion are the same thing. Merely that they both (as is every action in this life) are based on the concept of faith.
