ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Is science faith?

HisRoyalHighnessTheKing

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 34248

Report this Apr. 11 2008, 7:40 am

Quote (Rap_Ture @ April 11 2008, 3:32 am)
Quote (HisRoyalHighnessTheKing @ April 11 2008, 3:28 am)
Quote (Rap_Ture @ April 11 2008, 3:23 am)
Quote (HisRoyalHighnessTheKing @ April 11 2008, 3:18 am)
Quote
Faith is a hypothosis or evident demonstation on convincing evidence. I wouldn't have it any other way.


Faith is not based on "evidence" which can be tested.

If it could be tested it could either be proven or disproven.

Upon which belief in such evidence would either be rational or irrational.

I believe than it can be. People have completely different versions on it, but this is actually the real meaning of Faith according to scripture,about there being evidence.

People may have different definitions of "faith", but none in the traditional sense relate to scientific discovery and the way evidence is challenged.

The Biblical scriptures may have truth in part to their origins, and certain people and places mentioned may have existed, but the supernatural magical elements of the Bible cannot be tested and believers have never been able to provide any credible evidence, therefore belief in them is entirely based on faith, which in that sense is belief without supporting evidence to justify such a belief.

You can say the same in regards to a lot of theories based that way.

If you could say that, then they wouldn't be proper scientific theories.


A true scientific theory is based on the best available evidence.

But science always leaves open the possibility of a theory changing or being refined if new evidence comes to light.

blankenship

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1632

Report this Apr. 11 2008, 6:45 pm

Quote (HisRoyalHighnessTheKing @ Feb. 25 2008, 8:51 pm)
Quote (Constable_Odo_1 @ Feb. 25 2008, 3:53 pm)
Quote (HisRoyalHighnessTheKing @ Feb. 25 2008, 7:52 pm)
Quote (Constable_Odo_1 @ Feb. 25 2008, 3:38 pm)
Who is the designer behind the design?

Another designer.

:D

A designer none the less, King. Thank you.

And that's the problem with "intelligent design creationism"

It either uses infinite regression or at some point one of the designers becomes divine.

It's a religious theory disguised behind pseudo-scientific language.

Eugenie Scott's presentation (which you can see on YouTube) is just hilarious and makes ID look ridiculous.

ID is dishonest. Just say God and be done.

dryson

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 749

Report this Apr. 11 2008, 9:47 pm

Science is not faith.

Faith relies upon you putting your fate and trust in what someone else says is the truth but not has not proven it.

Science relies upon extensive investigation and precisely aquired information gathered from the surroundings and then shown to be true.

Faith says that if you believe in what the faith says you can obtain riches between on the dreams of avarice.

Science says if you don't get your lazy ass out there and go after what you want then you will never reach your goal.

AquamonkeyEG

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4915

Report this Apr. 12 2008, 1:01 am

I've said it before, there is infinite knowledge and finite time. It is impossible for you to go through all the steps and proofs of every scientific theory in detail. You have to accept it on good faith that someone has already done the proof. Lets take Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Most of you would accept it as true, but have you ever done the derivation yourself? How about E=mc^2? Most everyone accepts that as being true as well, but have they ever seen the derivation? NO. They believe it on faith in the scientific method.

GrandLunar2007

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1092

Report this Apr. 12 2008, 5:18 pm

I think I see the confusion here.

When it's said that science isn't faith, it's meant in the religous context.
That is, science isn't a faith.

Quote
Science says if you don't get your lazy ass out there and go after what you want then you will never reach your goal.


This reminds me of a saying that Dr. Plait likes to point out: a pair of hands grasping a shovel can accomplish more than a pair of hands clasped in prayer.

Grant_07

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 247

Report this Apr. 13 2008, 1:20 pm

The Scientific Method isn't the problem.

Many theories such as evolution, do not use the scientific method and instead are believed not on evidence but on assumptions and requires a leap of faith to believe in.

Is this "faith" in a relgious tone? Probably not, religion refers to the after-life.

Real science is not based on faith but real evidence that you can actually see and touch. Slowly over the last 100 years we have been moving away from real science and it's really wacky what some people refer to as science today.

Many people feel that science is open for interpertation which really isn't true. Either the facts line up or they don't.

Tannagra

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 15354

Report this Apr. 13 2008, 1:22 pm

Quote (Grant_07 @ April 13 2008, 1:20 pm)
The Scientific Method isn't the problem.

Many theories such as evolution, do not use the scientific method and instead are believed not on evidence but on assumptions and requires a leap of faith to believe in.

Is this "faith" in a relgious tone? Probably not, religion refers to the after-life.

Real science is not based on faith but real evidence that you can actually see and touch. Slowly over the last 100 years we have been moving away from real science and it's really wacky what some people refer to as science today.

Many people feel that science is open for interpertation which really isn't true. Either the facts line up or they don't.

Im sure you didn't mean that there is no evidence for Evolution?

AquamonkeyEG

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4915

Report this Apr. 13 2008, 8:41 pm

Quote (Grant_07 @ April 10 2008, 9:28 pm)
For example and I hate using this example but its a good one, long ago it was very popular to believe everything rotated around the Earth. Many mathmaticians knew for a fact that this just wasn't true and had some valid questions but primarily most of the scientist at the time looked for evidence to validate the universe orbited the Earth because it was very popular.

This was based on scientific observations of the motion of objects in the sky. It was not just "the popular" thing to do. Also, you aren't being very time-specific with "long ago."

I may forget some of the details, because it has been a few years since I studied this. The ancient Greeks observed the heavens and concluded that they revolved around the Earth. There were different models though: concentric spheres and eccentric circles. Even during the Renaissance they based their astronomical studies on these models until Copernicus and the Scientific Revolution.

Now that we have better tools to observe celestial phenomena we can conclude that Geocentric model is inaccurate. Then again it's all dependent on what your frame of reference is. The mathematical models that were developed to describe the motion of celestial bodies are completely valid taken from the frame of reference of the Earth. I forget who did the conversion to Heliocentric frame of reference and found the results to be identical.

GrandLunar2007

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1092

Report this Apr. 14 2008, 7:48 am

Quote
Many theories such as evolution, do not use the scientific method and instead are believed not on evidence but on assumptions and requires a leap of faith to believe in.


On the contrary, there is evidence for evolution.

A theory wouldn't be a theory if there was no evidence for it.

Are you sure you're not confusing hypothesises for theories?

dryson

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 749

Report this Apr. 17 2008, 8:02 pm

Faith is like following a leader who is an  ego maniac into an ambush during a war without first gathering intel on the area.

Science is gathering as much intel that you can and then hitting the area with artillery and airstrikes that way you can make sure you come out the other end alive in time to catch T'Pol in here unifrom at 7pm on the Sci-Fi Channel.

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: TheDriver, EDisConstant

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum