Heretic Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 I'll do my opinion of both Science and Relgion all at once and under 75 words no less Faith in science is as foolish as faith in religion. Neither can provide us all of the answers and both are being disproven more and more on a daily basis. Both are evolving. What science was 2000 years ago is NOT what science is today. It is as fair to judge science based on a 2000 year old text as it is to judge religion. Both have caused many deaths but also saved many lives. 75 even. Not too shabby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Strange thing about this thread is how it is not going to go anywhere, but that's o.k. I for one like religion, and science. I am not what many would call religious or a scientist, but that doesn't change anything. Life is a good thing in general, but not absolutely. The worst thing ever would be a world where learning and new ideas are not allowed, the best thing ever would therefore be the exact opposite. Terry Pratchett is awesome and Ratchett Screwdriver is the best game to be invented, ever, ever. Bang on 75, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 I'll do my opinion of both Science and Relgion all at once and under 75 words no less Faith in science is as foolish as faith in religion. Neither can provide us all of the answers and both are being disproven more and more on a daily basis. Both are evolving. What science was 2000 years ago is NOT what science is today. It is as fair to judge science based on a 2000 year old text as it is to judge religion. Both have caused many deaths but also saved many lives. If you don't mind, I'd like to ask you a question about your beliefs... You say that faith in religion is foolish, but how can that be? Doesn't belief in God, or to follow a religion require faith, seeing as how observation doesn't really prove God (especially not these days) doesn't it require faith? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john5746 Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 I enjoy sharing and debating my opinions on SFN. I enjoy reading diverse opinions from intelligent people without the PC expected in face to face discussions. I think having an open mind and willingness to expand horizons is paramount. Having these discussions has had an impact on my views, more than I probably realize. I feel more comfortable calling myself an atheist while having a deeper appreciation of faith. I have faith in myself and my family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 If you don't mind, I'd like to ask you a question about your beliefs... You say that faith in religion is foolish, but how can that be? Doesn't belief in God, or to follow a religion require faith, seeing as how observation doesn't really prove God (especially not these days) doesn't it require faith? I apologize I meant blind faith. I do believe that faith in religion and science is a good thing, in moderation. For example, if you're a practicing Christian and you refuse to accept the simple fact the the bible was organized and re-written by the Council of Nicaea then that's a bad thing. I'm not saying the bible is not the word of God, for all I know it is and I believe it is in spirit. However you have to accept the simple fact that scholars long since past did change it from what it was, not to mention translators, etc. The same goes for science. If you merely accept what is put in front of you and never test it or try to disprove it, that's a very bad thing. The point I was trying to make is religion and science are tools. How you use them reflects how you are. If you use either to prove you're right without questioning whether you might be wrong, that's pretty foolish. People need to explore the world for themselves, more often then not I find people turning against science or religion because they believe the two are mutually exclusive. They are far more similiar then they seem though and both have a great deal to offer. Wow... I'm not even counting those words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 I apologize I meant blind faith.. Ahh... that makes sense, and I agree with you 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyJoeCool Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 I don't believe in orginized religion. Each person is going to believe something a little bit different, so why should you conform your beliefs to what someone tells you is true? Believe what you believe... not what you pastor, or rabbi, or other such religious figure tells you to. To do anything different is to be dishonest to yourself and whatever God you may worship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 I'm much more of an argumentative person. My Jungian personality type operate by convincing myself of my own positions via argumentation much more than I use argument to inform or convince otherothers. My positions on issues tend to vacillate quite rapidly based on available information, and for the majority of my opinions I have held the opposite and decided to switch after evidence convinced me otherwise. Thus it's difficult for me to interact with with people who are fixed in their positions and not open to having their beliefs challenged. Most people take offense at having their beliefs challenged and thus interacting with them, when argumentation is the basis of a great deal of my own knowledge, has proven difficult. Nicely put and I agree wholeheartedly. And most people I know don't seem to understand this at all. Most folks see arguing as a negative. I prefer discussion over debate, but most of the time discussion seems to turn into debate. I recently ran into this problem with a co-worker during a discussion on psychology and criminal behavior. The moment I challenged his premise (that human advancement is bad), he got noticeably pissed off about it. I didn't even really have an opinion, I just wanted him to explain himself. Next thing I know he's using political platforms to justify his position. I wish people would quit being so dramatic about philosophy and deep discussion. It takes all the fun out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveC426913 Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 I apologize I meant blind faith. Is there any other kind of faith? Seriously. Isn't faith, by definition, blind? The corollary bring, if you can see it, you no longer need to have faith in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now