Quote:
Originally Posted by mIssIng:nO
And my question to Athiests who spew the "science tells us so" side of things. I'm in some agreement with you but I have a few questions.
1) Why do you naturally assume that everything is documented towards scientific findings is 100% correct? Science is all about expanding knowledge of what actually exists, and when you expand knowledge, certain things change about old things you already have looked at.
|
Speaking for myself, someone who says anything scientific is 100% correct doesn't know what science is, it's based heavily on falsifiability. The reason for this is to expand knowledge. The moment something is deemed 100% correct, you cant expand on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mIssIng:nO
2) Not everything is released and made public, you automatically assume because nothing has been made public about discoveries that it hasn't happened. Plenty of technology isn't known by the public eye, so why do you always assume that knowledge isn't with held to?
|
Again, speaking for myself, through my university I have access to many research articles and even when published, many are not available to the public. Generally only the abstracts are available. In addition, I talk with various professors, some of whom are current researchers in the field, such as for pharmacology, some professors are in that field and do discuss some of what is going on.
Lots of the research is made public but it doesn't make headline news, may not even be in the newspaper or on TV. Much of it you need to look at various sites yourself. For example, I often browse Nature News (which you don't need any special access to read) as well as read various studies by Nature and their off-shoot journals. I've read stuff in there, sometimes I post it on here and it is ground-breaking yet I look in the paper, on news television and not a word is mentioned.
Point is, some don't look through such sites, talk with experts, etc... and they may spew out what they hear from others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mIssIng:nO
3) Narrow minded thinking. Now I'm not saying athiests are narrow minded becuase thats just flat out not true. But my question to you is, why is this "out side the box" thinking made so evil in the eyes of Athiests. Critical thinking is good and needed yes, but without far fetched ideas and unorthodox thinking, many of the ideas we have today may not exist.
|
I agree, with the last part but could you give an example of the "outside the box thinking" precisely?
Religious titles aren't the be all end all of the world. It seems a religion gets tarnished the moment one out of, say, 100,000 believers does something horrible in the name of their religion. While I don't agree with religion, especially ones that have hateful things in it. However, a believer of such a religion isn't necessarily going to be hateful, they can get along with other believers despite their religion forbidding it.
But let's be realistic. Suppose we wipe out religion all over the world. There will no doubt be other non-scientific, perhaps illogical faith-relying ideas to serve as an explanation and way of obtaining knowledge. Not everyone will agree with science and once they don't, they find another way to explain things.