Alara317 said: Why is it that every discussion about the merits of religion has to devolve into 'but science doesn't have ALL The answers either!' debates? Nobody says that science has all the answers, at least not at any one given time. The whole point of science is to test and theorize and test and hypothesize and test some more. It's not perfect - by nature it can't be - but it's a lot more accurate than anything religion offers. When comparing the two, here's how it goes: Science - "How do I know? Well, I tested the theory, I repeated the results, I had it vetted by another who was able to also recreate my results in a lab. It was then posted and challenged in an open forum for others to criticise and scrutinize, and they all agreed as well." Religion - "How do I know? I read it in a book, and the author of that book assures me that they wouldn't lie to me." These two shouldn't even be in the same discussion. Science may not have all the answers and may never be perfect, but at least it attempts to answer questions with distiguishable authority. Religion does no such thing. The people who criticising religion - especially the catholic religion - aren't doing it from a place of arrogance or superiority (most of the time), but are criticising it because any belief system DESERVES to be criticised, scrutinized, and tested if they want to make the sort of claims ANY religion makes about our origins and the greater nature of the world around us. By denying any scrutiny or critique, religion has basically opened itself up to be the target of hate and disrespect. until it can back up its claims with evidence of ANY sort, it doesn't deserve your respect, and should be laughed at for the joke it is. Sadly we don't live in that world; we live in a world where religion is, for some stupid reason, put on the same level of science and demands the same amount of respect. Religion deserves to be in a science class about as much as Alex Jones needs to be teaching history. Or Trump deserves to be in the white house. Completely ill-equipped to fulfil that position. |
Except that's not what's happening here. The problem described by the OP is a socio-cultural problem. One could argue that's neither science nor religion in itself. The second discussion conserning the existance of God is something that falls in the realm of philosophy. Why? No science has the tools nor methods to say anything meaningful. Giving reason for ideas is something philosophical.
Some tried to hamfist science into the cosmological argument. I'm sorry, that just won't work. Sometimes you have to accept something is outside the realm of your chosen field.
Many people perceive religion to not be open whatsoever to scrutiny and respect. Often, that's not entirely true. There's an entire field to studying religion. It's called theology. And it's not some stale method either. Insights are renewed every so often.
By claiming this lack of "scientificness" opens religion to redicule solely bases on these grounds says more about your grounded lack of morals than your dedication to science.