View Single Post
  (#16 (permalink)) Old
Jack Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Jack's Avatar
 
Name: Jack
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Location: Kingston upon Hull/ Brighton, UK

Posts: 1,471
Points: 17,299, Level: 19
Points: 17,299, Level: 19 Points: 17,299, Level: 19 Points: 17,299, Level: 19
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: Religion or Science... Why not Both? - June 16th 2009, 03:59 PM

Because science and faith are sort of opposites. If you believe in the basics of scientific theory I can't see how you could believe in God unless in that segment of your life you suspend your belief in science.

For example for most scientific theories, generally when theories are created there is a hypothesis and a null hypothesis if you cannot show a significant probability that the hypothesis is true then you must accept the null hypothesis. So as the onus of proof is placed on the person wishing to prove that something exists (as proving something doesn't exist is impossible) the hypothesis must be that God exists and the null hypothesis must be that God does not exist. Therefore by the basic principles of science if you can't prove (at least to a certain extent) that God exists then you must accept your null hypothesis which is that God does not exist. Unless you can suspend your belief in science I don't understand how you can believe in God.

I can also see how people can say "God might exist" and still believe in science like agnosticism, but not active belief.

However, I can understand how certain, specific scientific beliefs such as evolution and the big bang can go hand in hand with religion. Just not science as a general entity.

Last edited by Jack; June 16th 2009 at 04:22 PM.