Science vs. faith

Your professor was entitled to his opinion, even though it conflicts with the spiritual influence Mendel's monastery brothers had on him. (As a newcomer, I can't yet cite outside sources.)
No, you can't directly link to outside sources. This is simply to discourage spammers from flooding the forum with links to ads for boner pills and the like. You can post the URL to any relevant sources and we will be happy to convert them into operating links.
 
I'm still curious to know how Mendel's religious beliefs informed his practice of the scientific method, and how this might have been different had he been an atheist.
 
Your professor was entitled to his opinion, even though it conflicts with the spiritual influence Mendel's monastery brothers had on him. (As a newcomer, I can't yet cite outside sources.)
We're still waiting for your evidence.
 
It this point, I have to conclude that skyrider44 is unable to support his claims regarding the role of faith in formulating scientific hypotheses.
 
Science: The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural.

Faith: Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

The title of this thread suffers from compatibility issues, which makes the suggested comparison difficult.
 
It this point, I have to conclude that skyrider44 is unable to support his claims regarding the role of faith in formulating scientific hypotheses.
The title of the thread creates a false implication that someone like skyrider44would follow. There is no Faith vs. Science, as much there is no Chicago Bears vs. Manchester United. But there is a particular interaction between science and religious faith as documented bellow.
The question of origin is also of central interest to the Vatican — and has been since the beginning of the Church. For the medievals in particular, the celestial heavens were a metaphor for the theological heaven. During the 16th and 17th centuries, the study of the stars was regarded almost as a branch of theology — "this divine rather than human science," Copernicus called it. Johannes Kepler, the founder of modern astrophysics, famously declared: "For a long time I wanted to become a theologian. Now, behold how through my efforts God is being celebrated in astronomy." Half a century later, Isaac Newton himself attributed the force of gravity to God.

Coyne, too, sees the material world as a manifestation of divine will. "The human person participates in the mystery of God, and so does the universe," he says. But he has no time for creationists and other biblical literalists and is exasperated by those who want to put limits on scientific inquiry. "I have friends who pray that science will never discover or explain certain things. I don't understand that," he declares. "Nothing we learn about the universe threatens our faith. It only enriches it.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.12/pope_astro.html

In this particlar case, science interacted with religious faith to the effect of creating heretics like Father George Coyone. LOL.
 
Last edited:
His genetic discoveries remain relevant because he brought to bear both scientific and religious faith.

What's so special about him believing in something that both you (as a Mormon) and I (as an atheist) agree is not true? How is that a significant feature in making his discoveries relevant?
 
Why then do scientists posit hypotheses if they have no faith their theories will be validated?
Your understanding of the meaning of "faith" must differ from the one which is understood by others and which is supported by the word's definition, otherwise you wouldn't come up with such a strange statement. In general, faith describes a degree of confidence, and it happens to be at the highest level in this case. In other words, faith means complete confidence. If you have complete confidence in your theory, then you skip proposing a hypothesis.

Hypothesis: A supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation.

Religious faith and the confidence level acquired by scientific methods are achieved quite differently, unless the scientist becomes suspicious about God's intervention, like I know that I'm not that smart to come up with such a great idea. That option doesn't concern the scientist/atheist. He just goes to the kitchen to inform his wife that he is getting smarter and smarter and smarter still... Honey, we go to Oslo soon!
 
The title of the thread creates a false implication that someone like skyrider44would follow. There is no Faith vs. Science, as much there is no Chicago Bears vs. Manchester United. But there is a particular interaction between science and religious faith as documented bellow.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.12/pope_astro.html

In this particlar case, science interacted with religious faith to the effect of creating heretics like Father George Coyone. LOL.

Eh? I guess that bet's lost then.
 
Let's save this thread from the trolls...

OP title: Faith vs. Science

The title matches two methods of investigation: faith and science.

:confused:

Well, faith is not a method of investigation, but some atheists, like the author of the OP, believe the primitive myth that it is.
 
Last edited:
Let's save this thread from the trolls...

OP title: Faith vs. Science

The title matches two methods of investigation: faith and science.

:confused:

Well, faith is not a method of investigation, but some atheists, like the author of the OP, believe the primitive myth that it is.
The OP is a post that was split from the LDS thread. Its author is not an atheist.
 
Let's save this thread from the trolls...

OP title: Faith vs. Science

The title matches two methods of investigation: faith and science.

:confused:

Well, faith is not a method of investigation, but some atheists, like the author of the OP, believe the primitive myth that it is.

You haven't been paying attention.
 
The ancients had prayer. It didn't help them much more than sucking their thumbs. Only through the application of reason and logic did we advance.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom