science vs religon, which one is important and needed ? Rating Options

[DaTru KataLYST]

science vs. religion. HAHA great topic.

okay... well since religion is always right. (that's what i was taught at chuch) i think, religion is better!

Please, this is debate..

Make a statement, and back it up with concrete evidence.

[Spirited Away]

science vs. religion. HAHA great topic.

okay... well since religion is always right. (that's what i was taught at chuch) i think, religion is better!

"Chuch" sure is smart to teach you that religion is right all the time... but "Chuch" should really teach you how to think for yourself first.

[mechwarrior1989]

Science is of course more important. What if we didn't have science and relyed merely upon religion? Great, you are now in a position to contract small pox and die. There goes your life. Because of science, deadly diseases have been virtually eliminated. I hardly see that happening during the middle ages with the out break of the Black Plague seeing as how 1/3 of Europe's population died even though they were all highly religious. I'm sure all that praying helped to save them.

Religion cannot be confused with ethics, ethics are what we aquire as we grow up which determain what we believe to be right or wrong. Religion can sometimes govern our ethics, but then we can look at certain religions that teach people to kill. The Taliban uses religion as a reason to kill Americans and other infidels. Good job religion, way to screw us over again. The good that religion can do though are things like bringing people together or giving people hope, but other things can do that as well, so what does religion ultimatly do? Nothing, just a waste of time, and money.

[mechwarrior1989]

aznxdreamer Posted on Dec 25 2004, 4:42 PM
what about religons? do they do any good and help people ? does it make them them feel safer ?

Key word, feel. So religion lulls us into a false sense of security. What if barbarians with technology superior to our own were to threaten to destroy us? Would us having more religion save us? I think not. Suppose a nuke was heading at your house, sent by people who have absolutly no belief in religion, only personal gain, would you praying save you? During the times of the Roman Empire, they would throw Christians into the Colossium and let out hungry lions. Of course the Christians would get in a circle and they'd star praying their hearts out, but eventurally they would all be eaten and the crowds would roar and everyone would leave cheerful, except the Christians who are now ripped to pieces and leave in the bellies of the lions.

[mechwarrior1989]

Religion...It is really really important to me and I am very close with God. (please don't be offended )

I am so offended, you are closer to God than I am, so who's keeping score exactly? How many points do you have and how exactly do you find out? So what do you get after you win? Can you even win? So how do you score points? Do you get a point everytime you go to church? Do you get a point when you pray? Do you get a point when you go on those retreats which are basically for having fun with the coverup as being a way to get "closer" to God? If I were to stand on stilts, I'd be taller than you, wouldn't I then be closer to God? Because you're closer to god, does that mean a halo of light glows around you constantly? Has God given you any special powers to convert the heathens? So has God whispered in your ear and told you of the future? What in the world gives you the idea that you're closer to God? Oh yea, you're tight with God so he probably told you that you're his number one right? ARe you even thinking when you say that or are you just blurting out the crap that they brainwash you with at church?

Science may explain to us how many things happen but it is leading us to loads of problems, like the stem cell research and such. Most of science is inhumane and the only way I agree with science is if it is stating facts, not some mythological bullshit.

So do you believe that EVERYTHING in the bible is true? Both old and new? Or only new? And since when did you decide what was fact and what was not? What if evolution was a fact? You would then be contradicting yourself. Do you know what mythological means?

Main Entry: myth·o·log·i·cal
Pronunciation: "mi-th&-'lä-ji-k&l
Variant(s): also myth·o·log·ic /-jik/
Function: adjective
1 : of or relating to mythology or myths : dealt with in mythology
2 : lacking factual basis or historical validity : MYTHICAL,

So either you're saying that the theory of evolution relates to myths or that it lacks factual basis or historical validity. Well I can assure you that it doesn't fit into either of those catagories. HOWEVER, I can think of certain Christian ideals that do fit into one of those two, for example, the belief that there is a God. I believe that that lacks a great deal of factual basis. The theory of Adam and Eve being the first two humans and then populating the earth, yea bit of a problem with that as well. Where are the facts or historical validity for that matter? Seems like a myth to me. So if I understand you correctly, you'd be calling you're own religion bullshit which is right since that's exactly what it is.

[Mireh]

I'm starting to read Angel and Deamons, [dan brown, author of da vinci code]. This dude in the book had a theory that god and science corresponded with one another, -like, it balances each other out. I think that science is a way to help us uncover the answers that we are always asking (how did the universe come to be? why are we here? do we have a purpose?), but in the end, it leads to god.

sorry for my vaugueness.

[illriginal]

Both.

[Tweeti]

I think they're both important, i'm a christian but science has advanced us alot. I've heard things on the news scientifically proving the bible right, like with the finding of Noah's ark.

[illriginal]

I think they're both important, i'm a christian but science has advanced us alot. I've heard things on the news scientifically proving the bible right, like with the finding of Noah's ark.

o.O can you source that? I thought scientists were still having a hard time with findin it?

[Tweeti]

o.O can you source that? I thought scientists were still having a hard time with findin it?

i heard it on the news, i went to kctv.com and they deleted the article because it is over 2 weeks old, but here iss somthing that i googled. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...7_noahsark.html

[NoSex]

i heard it on the news, i went to kctv.com and they deleted the article because it is over 2 weeks old, but here iss somthing that i googled. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...7_noahsark.html

You may want to learn how to actually research, as opposed to cherry picking what you like... same site, easy google find, four months later:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20..._noahs_ark.html


Noah's Ark has never been found and there is all evidence to the contrary that the flood even ever occurred.

Science wins, sorry.

[Melissa]

There's no use arguing against a religion using science. Most religions are based on faith, so it doesn't matter if there's scientific proof that Noah's Arc never happened. Therefore, you can't really say science wins. I can't really think of an example right now, but if you were in some sort of abstract, psychological competition based on beliefs and were told that the other side won because, in their logic, everything points to what they believe, you'd probably tell them to stfu.

While there may be claims of scientific findings supporting events in the Bible, in the end, it all comes down to faith. And science can't really shake that.

And... I'm not speaking as a Christian or an Atheist, since at the moment, I'm really... nothing. I don't claim to be agnostic, religious, atheist, whatever. I'm just confused.

[datass]

thinking of how you word your sentences now, and how you did back in 2004.. makes me laugh.

anyways.

science is much better. science is basically what has changed our world from farming and sword fighting to cars without the horse. without scientific knowledge, and just plain faith, it just wont get us far.

[NoSex]

There's no use arguing against a religion using science. Most religions are based on faith, so it doesn't matter if there's scientific proof that Noah's Arc never happened. Therefore, you can't really say science wins. I can't really think of an example right now, but if you were in some sort of abstract, psychological competition based on beliefs and were told that the other side won because, in their logic, everything points to what they believe, you'd probably tell them to stfu.

Here, I'll try to construct a more obvious analogy for you:

If you're playing the game of basketball, you follow a certain set of rules (these rules help the game along). Well, imagine that you decided that, for whatever reason, you wanted to invent a contrary set of arbitrary (maybe nondescript) rules for basketball. Now, that's fine and all, but those rules might not be conductive to the spirit of the game (consider the reality of epistemology and the scientific method). If you try to implement those rules, against the rules of the original game, you're going to look like an ass. Further, you aren't going to convince anyone that you're a good or fair player. Essentially, you'll just ruin the game for everyone.

It's sort of like science and faith. The principles of science are demonstrative; they are tested and work very well. We can make predictions using science, and can, using strict rationalism, find out exactly where we might have gone wrong in a specific hypothesis. In the case of faith, none of this is true. We can not form meaningful predictions using faith. We can not demonstrate faith. We can not point out precisely where one may or may not go wrong in their own practice of faith. In fact, we don't even have a semblance of an idea of what faith truly is (aside from an emotional substitution for reason).

So, science does win. Just because you try to change the rules in the middle of the game don't mean shit. Science wins.

[Reidar]

Ben Stein: "Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people."

I couldn't agree more, which is why science wins.

[Tweeti]

You may want to learn how to actually research, as opposed to cherry picking what you like... same site, easy google find, four months later:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20..._noahs_ark.html


Noah's Ark has never been found and there is all evidence to the contrary that the flood even ever occurred.

Science wins, sorry.

Well, maybe you may want to learn how to actually research things... this is as of 2008.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1972044/posts


Found Material evidence... science doesn't win, sorry.

[Tung]

like they say. you can never debate about religion and science. its too vast and complicated =\

I posted this 4 years ago, and I still stand by it.

Science is an ideology, and has it's limitations. Science is a social institution just like religion is. Science is a method of empirical observation, they have a vast body of knowledge. However, you can't take for word what science have said, as science is also a personal experience and there's bias on how you view the world. Science has two functions. 1.) to inform 2.) to answer how and why.
Science is constantly explaining the world, and there's a series notion of legitimatization on the "facts" and theories they state.

Nate, is right when he states that religion is all about faith. However, how can you prove that these things religion claims are true without possibly trying to prove it like science does? You can't. So how have the Church been able to have such an impact on so many people for so long? I think it's because of how they articulate their power, and they have persuaded people of it's appearances of natural order.

Is science ever 100% certain? No
Is religion ever 100% certain? No

Science can't ever be the answer, as much as religion can't be. Nobody wins in this debate.

[brooklyneast05]

Well, maybe you may want to learn how to actually research things... this is as of 2008.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1972044/posts
Found Material evidence... science doesn't win, sorry.

^ explain to me how you think a wooden structure can survive 4,000 + years

maybe you should learn how to actually give credible sources

A panel of experts, comprising Turkish authorities, veteran mountaineers, archaeologists, geologists and members of Hong Kong-based Noah’s Ark Ministries International, also displayed an almost one-metre-long peice of petrified wood before the media and specially invited international experts.

do you know how long it takes to petrify wood? i'll promise you it takes a whole lot longer than the bible claims the world has even existed for.


i'm failing to see how a piece of wood would prove noah's ark

[Reidar]

Yet another piece of petrified wood found to be Noah's Ark? He must have had a fleet of the things.

The comments seem to coincide with that sentiment: "Look, I’m pretty religious, but we hear these 'they found Noahs’ ark!' things about twice a year now."

science is also a personal experience and there's bias on how you view the world.

Hardly. Science is about uncovering the objective truth. In the process of doing so, we must be tentative and receptive to improvements and developments because science is, by definition, self-corrective, when need be. That does not make it a relative, personal concept, susceptible to individual bias. The only bias science holds is to that which is correct.

[freeridefight]

Science.


Science has progressed us through the ages. With the variety of branches (biology, chemistry, physics) we have come to understand the world around us much more clearly. Overall, it has better our lives much more than religion ever will.

Religion can be interpreted in so many ways, which in my eyes is so retarded. Why the hell would you want to follow principles and rules that could of been misinterpreted by a group of people or person in the past where the circumstances were so much different.

I'm not saying we should denounce these morals and values, but science is way more important.

Overall, isn't that was religion is? Understanding the world around us?

[Tung]

^ u can say the same for religion.

[freeridefight]

^ u can say the same for religion.

How has religion allowed us to find true solid facts about the world around us?

There have been to many wars or violence for that matter because one person interpreted this and another didn't. That, Tung, is not science.

[Tung]

Re-read your post douche. You never said anything about "solid facts about the world around us" And that's why I said you could say the same about religion.

I'm atheist, so don't think I support religion. I'm just saying you can't say science is better than religion and that they win. Nobody wins in this case.

[freeridefight]

Re-read your post douche. You never said anything about "solid facts about the world around us" And that's why I said you could say the same about religion.

I'm atheist, so don't think I support religion. I'm just saying you can't say science is better than religion and that they win. Nobody wins in this case.

that is what it's saying. Science gives us solid information that we use everyday. Science is way better than religion.

Where was religion ever more important than science? No where. Science wins.

[Tung]

Sigh..you just don't get it. Let me break this down for you..and I hope you do actually read everything before replying.

Do you know what an ideology is?

Science is a social institution about which there is a great deal of misunderstanding, even among those who are part of it. We think that science is an institution, a set of methods, a set of people, a great body of knowledge that we call scientific, is somehow apart from the forces that rule our everyday lives and that govern the structure of our society. We think that science is objective. Science has brought us all kinds of good things. It has tremendously increased the production of food. It has increased our life expectancy from a mere 45 years at the beginning of the last century to over 70 in rich places like North America. It has put people on the moon and made it possible to sit at home and watch the world go by.

At the same time, science, like other productive activities, like the state, the family, sport, is a social institution completely integrated into and influenced by the structure of all our other social institutions. The problems that science deals with, the ideas that it uses in investigating those problems, even the so-called scientific results that come out of scientific investigation, are all deeply influenced by predispositions that derive from the society in which we live. Scientists do not begin life as scientists, after all, but as social beings immersed in a family, state, a productive structure, and they view nature through the lens that has been molded by their social experience.

Above that personal level of perception, science is molded by society because it is human productive activity that takes time and money, and so is guided by and directed by those forces in the world that have control over money and time. Science uses commodities and is part of the process of commodity production. Science uses money. People earn their living by science, and as a consequence the dominate social and economic forces in society determine to a large extent what science does and how it does it. More than that, those forces have the power to appropriate from science ideas that are particularly suited to the maintenance and continued prosperity of the social structures of which they are a part. So other social institutions have an input into science both in what is done and how it is thought about, and they take from science concepts and ideas that then support their institutions and make them seem legitimate and natural.

It is this dual process, on the one hand, of the social influence and control of what scientists do and say, and, on the other hand, the use of what scientists do and say to further support the institutions of society--that is meant when we speak of science as ideology.

Not saying, that science is a bad thing, we just have to realize the bias and limitations science do have. And the same could be said about religion. Nobody wins.

/debate