(August 17, 2016 at 9:11 am)LadyForCamus Wrote:(August 17, 2016 at 8:58 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I agree, that science and religion are not the same. I also agree with you, that these are bad arguments. That was my point from the beginning. I don't believe that the differences in science and religion change the principles, of how we acquire knowledge, and justify our beliefs. This would be special pleading, and unjustified.
Before you go; however, could you do me the courtesy, of explaining what you believe is fallacious, and why my reasoning is incorrect here, that calls for the above post.
I already explained to you in the post you just quoted why drawing false similarities between science and religion to make them appear they are on equal par is fallacious.
So, now what YOU need to do is explain to me what this means:
"I agree, that science and religion are not the same. I also agree with you, that these are bad arguments. That was my point from the beginning. I don't believe that the differences in science and religion change the principles, of how we acquire knowledge, and justify our beliefs."
Because to me that sounds like you saying one thing, and then saying the opposite out the side of your neck, if you catch my drift.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It means that I don't think you are justified in making these arguments against one thing, and then denying them when the same principles can be applied to science, that I rely on other's for knowledge of. Science may contain instances where repeatability is required for the claim, and I would agree, that this is good, and if anyone who questions can be shown or told how to see the same results for themselves that does increase the certainty one can have. However if you haven't seen for yourself, then you are relying on the same faith and reason, as in other categories for knowledge.