Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:04 PM Apr 2013

Scientific fact vrs. religious faith? [View all]

Despite the often toxic form of many of these religious conversations, I have learned a few important things, particularly from the atheists who post here. For one thing, they despise the same sort of fundamentalist religion that I despise. Beyond that, they have lured me to take science much more seriously. I have long held that science is not the enemy of religion, science is the enemy of ignorance. No intelligent person, religious or non-religious can afford not to take science seriously.

But insofar as science is simply a collection of unalterable facts, no intelligent scientist would be caught dead trying to affirm that one. The other day in a conversation with a sub-atomic physicist, he suggested that the scientific community is always involved in convictions of things not provable--that's called faith. Right now, he tells me, the debate between Einsteinian relativity and quantum mechanics is raging. Both cannot be right. Advocates of both claim factual knowledge, but are really talking about faithful conclusions based on unprovable faith claims.

It has always been so when science is at its best. Cosmologists were certain that Ptolemy was right. And then they were certain Copernicus was right. Later they were sure that Newton was right and that the universe is a collection of parts. Along come a new generation of scientists convinced that the universe is one giant interconnected cosmic web and the Newtonians had it wrong. It is now clear to the best scientific minds that no one can assume to know incontrovertible facts, and that every observation of a natural phenomenon is conditioned by the agent that observes it. Is is a wave, or is it a particle? And much more.

Any religionist who says, "I have the facts," is in serious trouble. We in the religious world rely on trust without knowing for certain--as Paul says, "we see in a very dim mirror." All good scientists are in the same boat. Those on either side who won't admit it are subjects of ridicule. In science and in religion, a good supply of humility is a necessary virtue.

33 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Scientific fact vrs. religious faith? [View all] Thats my opinion Apr 2013 OP
A scientist can generally tell you what facts would change their mind about a theory. trotsky Apr 2013 #1
except humility in a scientific dispute is honored as proper ChairmanAgnostic Apr 2013 #2
As long as you keep identifying religion with fundamentalism Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #4
I think that's why he says "fundie religions" EvolveOrConvolve Apr 2013 #13
Scientific Theories are models of reality... Ron Obvious Apr 2013 #3
You last major paragraph is on target. Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #6
OK. Ron Obvious Apr 2013 #10
Science is NOT "simply a collection of unalterable facts." cleanhippie Apr 2013 #5
No really it is. They are all in The Big Book of Unalterable Science Facts. Warren Stupidity Apr 2013 #17
Few points... gcomeau Apr 2013 #7
Yours is a very helpful response. Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #9
I would just point out... gcomeau Apr 2013 #11
Now why are you complaining? skepticscott Apr 2013 #14
You made it through the first paragraph ok skepticscott Apr 2013 #8
I had forgotten about that gem. trotsky Apr 2013 #12
The debate between relativity and QM is "raging" you say? dimbear Apr 2013 #15
I'm just reporting how an outstanding subatomic scientist sees it. Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #18
Let me give you the best answer to another question your raise, one which may sound a little dimbear Apr 2013 #20
Ha Ha But scientists report that both are correct. nt. Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #24
You really, really need to read this link that skepticscott provided: trotsky Apr 2013 #25
What are the bets? skepticscott Apr 2013 #29
No chance he reads it. trotsky Apr 2013 #30
If you're going to Ha Ha, Charles skepticscott Apr 2013 #28
I suspect you misunderstood him. gcomeau Apr 2013 #23
OMG Charles skepticscott Apr 2013 #31
Faith is commitment to a position with no evidence Lordquinton Apr 2013 #32
I think "faith" is the wrong word to use goldent Apr 2013 #16
Science seems clear Thats my opinion Apr 2013 #19
Which is why fundamental scientific theories skepticscott Apr 2013 #21
" Cosmologists were certain that Ptolemy was right. And then they were certain Copernicus was right. edhopper Apr 2013 #22
Well, I know of no raging debate between QM and relativity. longship Apr 2013 #26
Sorry, Charles...there is no "raging debate" skepticscott Apr 2013 #27
It looks like your friend, the physicist, knew what he was talking about. Jim__ Apr 2013 #33
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Scientific fact vrs. reli...»Reply #0