Page 1 of 1
Why is it Un-scientific to have Faith...?
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 7:15 am
by Whistwisth
Why is it un-Faithful to be scientific?
For the sake of clarity, i had to ask the question from both...'sides' of arrow.
I am of the mind that science denies and derides faith, more so than faith disuses science. I am of the faith that science is no more or less than simple material gain and access, to no more or less than the material that is of success.
It is only due Faith, that there any debate or discussion, as to a Superiority of 'subject', for a 'self' alone is as unscientific as a soul null-in-void is unfaithful.
It not a matter of science answering universal equation, it a matter of Faith that any can, Will and do, ask Why.
Re: Why is it Un-scientific to have Faith...?
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:34 pm
by bobevenson
All religions, with the notable exception of the Church of Ouzo, are sham religions based on sheer superstition. The question of why we are here, and the nature of what caused it, is beyond the realm of science, which deals in cause and effect.
Re: Why is it Un-scientific to have Faith...?
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 1:48 am
by Whistwisth
bobevenson wrote:All religions, with the notable exception of the Church of Ouzo, are sham religions based on sheer superstition. The question of why we are here, and the nature of what caused it, is beyond the realm of science, which deals in cause and effect.
I have a fleeting connection of thought to the Church of 'Ouzo'...though I cant quite locate it, would you do me the favour of reminding me, or possibly informing me what it is?
Does it have anything to do with...James Joyce?
How do you know they a sham, have they scammed you?
Do you know what superstition is? and what the difference of Faith is to this? and to 'cause and effect' is genesis?
How is science a realm? more so, I presume from your vernacular, a realm that has something that goes beyond it, which would, as with your assertion, also go to say there was a, is a realm that comes before it...
Thanks
Re: Why is it Un-scientific to have Faith...?
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:05 pm
by bobevenson
Whistwisth wrote:bobevenson wrote:All religions, with the notable exception of the Church of Ouzo, are sham religions based on sheer superstition. The question of why we are here, and the nature of what caused it, is beyond the realm of science, which deals in cause and effect.
I have a fleeting connection of thought to the Church of 'Ouzo'...though I cant quite locate it, would you do me the favour of reminding me, or possibly informing me what it is?
Does it have anything to do with...James Joyce?
How do you know they a sham, have they scammed you?
Do you know what superstition is? and what the difference of Faith is to this? and to 'cause and effect' is genesis?
How is science a realm? more so, I presume from your vernacular, a realm that has something that goes beyond it, which would, as with your assertion, also go to say there was a, is a realm that comes before it...
Thanks
My position on other religions is based on observation and general principles of logical analysis. Information on the Church of Ouzo can be found at
http://church-of-ouzo.com.
Re: Why is it Un-scientific to have Faith...?
Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 10:12 pm
by copernico
Whistwisth wrote:Why is it un-Faithful to be scientific?.
Because faith is the acceptance without evidence. Once evidence is found it is no longer faith but knowledge.
Re: Why is it Un-scientific to have Faith...?
Posted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:51 pm
by jinx
Why is it un-Faithful to be scientific?
For the sake of clarity, i had to ask the question from both...'sides' of arrow.
I am of the mind that science denies and derides faith, more so than faith disuses science. I am of the faith that science is no more or less than simple material gain and access, to no more or less than the material that is of success.
It is only due Faith, that there any debate or discussion, as to a Superiority of 'subject', for a 'self' alone is as unscientific as a soul null-in-void is unfaithful.
It not a matter of science answering universal equation, it a matter of Faith that any can, Will and do, ask Why.
Anything in the past (observed or unobserved) is not empirical/observational science. Man can not go back in time and repeat/observe/experiment on said event and so would fall into the category of forensic/historical science. A level of 'faith' is involved for past events (atheists HATE that word loooooool). All men start with a set of basic presuppositions and then infer details/scenarios/possibilities of past events based on those presuppositions. Depending on what ones presuppositions are depends on the inferences one makes.
Re: Why is it Un-scientific to have Faith...?
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:54 am
by Negative SEO
it isn't. however, if it leads one to ignore scientific evidence, then it is.