jon hall wrote: >Wednesday, June 25, 2003, 3:40:56 PM, you wrote: >> Isn't the belief in the Big Bang, Evolution Theory and the Law of >> Relativity (just to mention a few) the ultimate proof of this? What is >> this thing we call science? Is it really 'Science', or merely the result >> of the application of Ockham's Razor to the universe as we know it? Just >> like deity X was the result of application of Ockham's Razor four >> thousand years ago? >> >> I think 'science' is just the latest religion. But instead of saying 'if >> you help the poor, you go to heaven' it says 'e = m*c^2'. > >This is absolutely insane... > >Find me a religion who's beliefs will stand up to the scientific method >and I will become a convert. If you don't believe in the scientific >method...there is no point in discussing this further as we can't talk >on the same level.
Find me a science who's theorems stand up to the religious method..... Certain religions refused to accept scientific proof that the earth revolves around the sun, because that proof was not based upon the same fundamentals as the religion was. They are fundamentally incompatible, you can not prove one using the methods of the other. >I will say, that beyond a shadow of a doubt, I do believe in logic, or >said another way, I believe in my own thought processes. Cogito ergo sum. >If you can't believe in your own thought processes, how can you even form a >reliable opinion about the scientific method? What are our thought processes if we assume that science is correct? Merely hemical reactions taking place. How much of it is instinct? How much is free will? What is free will according to the scientific method? The chemical reactions which are the basis of our thinking (according to the scientific method) follow the laws of thermodynamics (according to the scientific method). So how can free will even exist (according to the scientific method)? And if free will can't exist (according to the scientific method), how can I form a reliable opinion about it? I believe the scientific method is a religion. It is the one I like most of all because it is quite predictable, it imposes no moral theorems which I believe to be arbitrary, but I do think it is a religion just like any other religion. Where it differs from the religions most people think of when you mention religion, is that it has a built-in method to adapt itself. It is the scientific method itself that says a model is just a model, and if there are experiments to show the model is flawed, we just need to built a better model. (Which in turn is quite like the religion from the Romans, who just added a few extra deities to their religion whenever they conquered a people that had new deities.) Jochem ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Host with the leader in ColdFusion hosting. Voted #1 ColdFusion host by CF Developers. Offering shared and dedicated hosting options. www.cfxhosting.com/default.cfm?redirect=10481 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
