God V Science (again)

close
more_vert
handofdave H
handofdave Sep 13, 2008 04:15:10
Replying to shanshee_allures

It's just as arrogant to declare the absence of a God as it is to declare the primacy of one.

Science can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a deity or deities, and therefore scientists should not absolutely declare the impossibility of such a being.

This isn't about matching punches with the religious fundamentalists, it's about staying true to science, which demands, in it's most pure state, an open mind at all times that only responds to measurable, verifiable results.

S shanshee_allures
shanshee_allures Sep 13, 2008 04:25:49
Replying to handofdave

'They' have posited to Dawkins in interviews that science can only declare upon what it knows to be fact etc, so when asked 'how can you be so sure' when it comes to god he usually gives a smiling mildly sheepish 'it seems too unlikely' etc, which I agree with, and I agree with his points about all the crap that goes on in its name (even if it does become a case of 'don't shoot the messenger'). Hell I don't know if I'd even want there to be a god.

I mean Dawkins goes on about the likelyhood of chocolate teapots in space (or something), but scientists used to not care because their conviction was too great, and they were too busy with reality. God to them was just 'hokum'. Care about the horrors people do to each other, yes, but why conflate it all?
Hope I make some sense:-)

x

L Lawrence
Lawrence Sep 15, 2008 16:52:21
Replying to handofdave

I've always believed there was a god anyways, even when my Catholic faith shattered.