A scientific theory might be called a "belief" only insofar as we also "believe" that 1+1=2 in any number system base 3 or above. But belittling the theorem that supports that statement by calling it a "belief" would also logically weaken your claim that you exist.
Such are the consequences of ignoring logic.
Scientific theories have proofs. There is logic behind them. Religious beliefs do not have proofs. They are based on faith, and to maintain them logic is both unnecessary and undesirable.
Far too many people do not know what science is and are unable to appreciate its rigorous procedures for separating fact from fiction. We do not even teach how to think in our schools, much less how to distinguish science from conjecture. This results in conversations like this one where we attempt to find similarit
ies between science and religion, one of the dumber things that we do. And as this discussion shows, we don't even do very well at comparing science and religion.
There are no similarities between science and religion other than that they are both sets of ideas that are carried in peoples' minds. One requires rigorous thinking and skepticism, the other requires faith and a willingness to suspend disbelief.
Regrettably, many people believe that religion is necessary as a limiter of science. That foolish idea, founded not only on an irrational fear of learning but also on a more rational fear of what we might
do with our learning, has saddled us with such handicaps as the current pseudo-debate about evolution.
Fortunately, however, religion is unnecessary if we need to know what is morally/ethically right and wrong. Most people do not need a fear of eternal damnation to keep from killing someone else. It is probably true that religion
does keep some people in line, but Darwin is probably taking care of them.
This discussion shows that a better educational system is imperative.
by
EveningStarNM on
03/23/2008 04:26:12 AM EST
[
Parent ]
