Reasonable said:
Sorry, got to pick you up on this. Science is not, absolutely not, I mean really, really NOT a belief. Science is about facts and evidence. With science, the principle is to have no belief whatsoever. If you need to believe in science then you're either missunderstanding it or don't want - which is understandable - to take the time to check it yourself - I don't in many cases, but let's not confuse what that means. For example, I believe E=MC2. But only because I am comfortable that it has been well proven and tested. But I don't have to believe in it and I don't in the same principle as religion. If I want, I can work out that E=MC2 because it can be done and come to the same answer. In short, anything in science can be repeatably and reliably re-tested by anyone who wants to do so. Another example, I don't have to believe in astronomers findings regarding planets, moons, etc. I can set up a telescope and check myself. In this latter case, I have done so a few times, and it is quite something to actually test and prove yourself that yes, what you read in a book is indeed true and matches your own observations. So no, no, no, no, no... Science is not a belief just like religion. TBH Science is the opposite of religion and that, in large part, is the root of a lot of the friction between the two. Religion is about belief without evidence, science more accurately can be said to be about disbelief without evidence. |
SCIENCE IS A BELIEF
It is not the same belief than religion because religion is a blind belief while science is "tested" belief.
In clear, Religion is all about belief in something without doubting, without asking yourself "where does it come from ? why ?". Religion is basically all about having faith in.
While in Science, you basically doubt about EVERYTHING, all the time. It is only when something has been proven/tested that you can come and say "it is true !" (your gravity example for example).
To me, it is not about "disbelief without evidence" but more "belief with evidence".
Of course, Science is not about faith ...
There is also just some very little shit in Science/Research :
- experimental error : whatever the level, you can have something wrong in the raw datas (because of the sample or the material used)
- interpretation error : scientist making a wrong interpretation
This means that what is true is often wrong ... suggesting you "only" belief it is true because it seems, right now, at this time, in these condition, "true"
Also, one of the major flaw of science is that, for most of us, it escapes from our understanding and so we are completely unable to prove/test it by ourself. This means we are, again, believing in what is said to be "true" wether it is true or not. I may know that electricity is produced by an electron movement ... I basically completely unable to prove it, neither propose an experiment to prove it. I m like 99.99% of the populaition : I belief what scientifc book/master says ... like in a religion.
To take another example : a computer is basically a pure black box for most of us. Fews people will be able to explain, and fully understand (at 100%) how it functions.
You know, I still agree with you for most of your points. I just consider that, at the end, Science is still about "belief". You may not blindly believe to old text or to religious guy like in religion BUT you will still believe in the scientific community that may be wrong, may publish shit, are just human with subjectif judgement AND is dealing with so complex stuff that the average guy is barely able to get what is happening.
You just belief in "human research/progress/knowledge" in a way.
At the end, when all is said : it is still about "belief or not"
Time to Work !
