A question about the lifespan of scientific theories.

[Anomalocaris]

A quick question to all of the people holding the facts out there:
I'm personally an Atheist, and was recently in a discussion with my Christian friend about God, evolution and so forth.
A thing that bugged me a bit was one of her "facts," which i could not really comment upon since i didn't have the knowledge about it.
Her argument was, that religion had lasted for thousands of years, and apparently (according to her "facts"), scientific theories have an average "lifespan" of about 30 years. Now i know for a fact that it's because science constantly discovers new things to replace the old theories, which i told her, but is this actually a fact, that theories have an average lifespan of 30 years?

Tell her it would be a trivial matter for science to descend to the level of religion by being wrong and never, ever, admitting to have ever been wrong. But science is not trivial, unlike religion.

[KevinM1]

igh: Only a theist would claim that an unchanging view of reality is a positive trait to have....

[Esquilax]

If we're going to be talking about averages for religion, wouldn't it require a more comprehensive view of the subject than just considering christianity in its current form as a whole? Like, say, all those cults and dead religions and denominational splits and religions destroyed by other competing ones? What would the average lifespan of religion be if we made sure to account for all the outliers, like Heaven's Gate, and so on?

Speaking of violently competing religions though, that's a fairly good retort, I'd say: even if science has a lifespan of thirty years, it doesn't turn around and devour itself the same way religion does. Scientific theories die peaceful deaths, while religion has a tendency to die violently.

[Simon Moon]

Hinduism is the oldest continuously practiced religion. I believe it predates Judaism by 1000 years. Ask your friend if being older than Judaism/Christianity makes it more true.

Theories are explanatory frameworks to explain a set of observed facts. The facts don't change, theories are modified to explain new facts.

Newtonian physics (over 400 years old) was not tossed out when Relativity was theorized. Relativity (100 years old) was not tossed out when QM was theorized.

[Anomalocaris]

Hinduism is the oldest continuously practiced religion. I believe it predates Judaism by 1000 years. Ask your friend if being older than Judaism/Christianity makes it more true.

Theories are explanatory frameworks to explain a set of observed facts. The facts don't change, theories are modified to explain new facts.

Newtonian physics (over 400 years old) was not tossed out when Relativity was theorized. Relativity (100 years old) was not tossed out when QM was theorized.

If the antiquity of Judiasm, an antecedent to jesus cult, can be used to inflate the venerability of the jesus cult, then we should count antecedent to Hinduism, found in harappan culture of Indus valley, in calculating the venerability of Hinduism.

When harappan culture is considered, then antecedent of Hinduism predated the antecedent of Jesus cult by at least 2500 years.

In other words, when the Jews first started to consider themselves chosen by their God, Hinduism is already as old, or older, then judiasm is NOW.

[Cyberman]

Scientific theories die peaceful deaths, while religion has a tendency to die violently.

Unfortunately, they have a regrettable tendency to take down everyone around them at the same time.

[robvalue]

The lifespan of a scientific theory is the amount of time it remains the most accurate and useful theory with regard to its subject matter.

The lifespan of a religion is how long people spend pretending it is true. After that, it gets added to the pile of "obviously made up" older religions, many of which it bears a shocking resemblance to. Then a newer, trendier one comes in that "really is true this time, no really!"

[psychoslice]

Tell a lie long enough and everyone will believe it, that's how Christianity has survived so long.

[Thumpalumpacus]

A quick question to all of the people holding the facts out there:
I'm personally an Atheist, and was recently in a discussion with my Christian friend about God, evolution and so forth.
A thing that bugged me a bit was one of her "facts," which i could not really comment upon since i didn't have the knowledge about it.
Her argument was, that religion had lasted for thousands of years, and apparently (according to her "facts"), scientific theories have an average "lifespan" of about 30 years. Now i know for a fact that it's because science constantly discovers new things to replace the old theories, which i told her, but is this actually a fact, that theories have an average lifespan of 30 years?

It depends on the idea. It depends on what she's calling a theory. It depends on how she defines "lifespan". And it depends who is selecting which theories. She should also take a look at the knowledge passed down by primitive societies which still live today as they have for thousands of years. Much of their knowledge, while not "scientific" in the Western sense of the word, predates the Bible by a long shot, and is much more accurate.

Personally, I trust science more precisely because it is self-correcting, in the same way that I trust someone more when they're willing to admit error. I mean, do you really listen to that asshole who can't admit error even when countervailing evidence is staring him in the face? Why then should we pay attention to faith, which has only taught man more reasons to hate one another?

[Tonus]

Tell a lie long enough and everyone will believe it, that's how Christianity has survived so long.

I think Christianity survived by backing its lies with deadly force.