Posts: 3676
Threads: 354
Joined: April 12, 2015
Reputation:
42
Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 12:26 pm
I’m really excited about what I’ve been learning about physics over in the physical science forum. It requires some reflection. When I think about it there’s still some level of fiat credulity involved. Unless I put my own eye to a telescope, I’m basically taking the scientist’ word for it that they saw what they say they saw and that their interpretation of what they saw is valid.
So if I haven't totally done away with faith, why do I accept the scientists and reject the preachers?
1. Scientists don’t pretend to have immutable revelation from an unchanging god and hope people won’t notice all the discrepancies.
2. And they support their findings through further study and peer review, not threats of hellfire and damnation for anyone who disagree with them.
3. Most of all, I can study science without throwing away my sense of what is right. Science doesn’t require me to love and worship a being who is reprehensible to me.
The god who allows children to be raped out of respect for the free will choice of the rapist, but punishes gay men for engaging in mutually consensual sex couldn't possibly be responsible for an intelligently designed universe.
I may defend your right to free speech, but i won't help you pass out flyers.
Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.
--Voltaire
Nietzsche isn't dead. How do I know he lives? He lives in my mind.
Posts: 7045
Threads: 20
Joined: June 17, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 12:28 pm
4. All (or most, at least) of the data is in fact available to you thru some means, even if it means subscribing to a journal/scientific society.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9176
Threads: 76
Joined: November 21, 2013
Reputation:
40
RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 12:32 pm
(This post was last modified: July 13, 2016 at 12:36 pm by Chad32.)
Unless you went out there and checked it yourself, you pretty much are taking a scientist's word for it. But the fact is, with the proper tools and education, you can go out there and check this stuff if you want to. Also if you find something that is different from what scientists believe, you can put it up for peer review and possibly become rich and famous. Do that with a religious text, and you're an apostate or heretic and generally shunned.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 1:03 pm
(This post was last modified: July 13, 2016 at 1:04 pm by robvalue.)
The difference is that scientists are making testable claims. Theologians are not.
Even if you can't personally get out there and test those claims, they are available for all to see, and for everyone to try and prove wrong. They've painted a target on their back, essentially. It's a scientist's job to disprove phoney stuff, and that they do. When some bullshit does leak through somehow, it gets discredited fairly quickly. Proving a major theory wrong would carry huge prestige as well. The idea that no one has bothered to check is stretching credulity.
Theologians just make unfalsifiable claims, almost all of the time. Such claims are useless. When they accidentally make a testable non-trivial claim about reality, it's normally proven false very quickly.
Posts: 30129
Threads: 304
Joined: April 18, 2014
Reputation:
92
RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 1:09 pm
Raise a question in the (for example) Mormon Church along the lines of "Which version of the revelation on polygamy should we follow?" and you'll be shown the door.
In science, you can read about how different versions of many theories have been evaluated and see which ones currently have the most vetted results.
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
Posts: 3709
Threads: 18
Joined: September 29, 2015
Reputation:
10
RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 1:22 pm
(July 13, 2016 at 12:32 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Unless you went out there and checked it yourself, you pretty much are taking a scientist's word for it. But the fact is, with the proper tools and education, you can go out there and check this stuff if you want to. Also if you find something that is different from what scientists believe, you can put it up for peer review and possibly become rich and famous. Do that with a religious text, and you're an apostate or heretic and generally shunned.
Actually the journal Nature has been hitting pretty hard on reproducibility lately. How often it is attempted and when attempted how often it is unsuccessful may surprise you.
http://www.nature.com/news/reality-check...ty-1.19961
http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scienti...ty-1.19970
Posts: 9176
Threads: 76
Joined: November 21, 2013
Reputation:
40
RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 1:35 pm
(July 13, 2016 at 1:22 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: (July 13, 2016 at 12:32 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Unless you went out there and checked it yourself, you pretty much are taking a scientist's word for it. But the fact is, with the proper tools and education, you can go out there and check this stuff if you want to. Also if you find something that is different from what scientists believe, you can put it up for peer review and possibly become rich and famous. Do that with a religious text, and you're an apostate or heretic and generally shunned.
Actually the journal Nature has been hitting pretty hard on reproducibility lately. How often it is attempted and when attempted how often it is unsuccessful may surprise you.
http://www.nature.com/news/reality-check...ty-1.19961
http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scienti...ty-1.19970
That is a pretty big problem. Though obviously there are scientists who are working to solve this problem. With many people in religion, I doubt this would be considered a problem at all. Faith does not require reproducibility. otherwise it wouldn't the faith in the religious sense.
Posts: 28276
Threads: 522
Joined: June 16, 2015
Reputation:
90
RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 1:46 pm
(July 13, 2016 at 1:22 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: (July 13, 2016 at 12:32 pm)Chad32 Wrote: Unless you went out there and checked it yourself, you pretty much are taking a scientist's word for it. But the fact is, with the proper tools and education, you can go out there and check this stuff if you want to. Also if you find something that is different from what scientists believe, you can put it up for peer review and possibly become rich and famous. Do that with a religious text, and you're an apostate or heretic and generally shunned.
Actually the journal Nature has been hitting pretty hard on reproducibility lately. How often it is attempted and when attempted how often it is unsuccessful may surprise you.
http://www.nature.com/news/reality-check...ty-1.19961
http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scienti...ty-1.19970
What's your point? The ability to attempt to reproduce/test exists in science. Those results can then be analyzed/discussed. The ability to attempt to reproduce/test does not exist in theology.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental.
Posts: 30129
Threads: 304
Joined: April 18, 2014
Reputation:
92
RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 1:51 pm
Can you imagine a religion somewhere locking up 2 revelators in 2 widely separate locations, incommunicado with each other, and the religion accepting as dogma only the identical bits they both uttered in common ??
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
Posts: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 13, 2016 at 1:54 pm
(This post was last modified: July 13, 2016 at 1:55 pm by Whateverist.)
If a scientist approaches her work with integrity what she finds out will either be reliable or distorted by human error. If a priest approaches her work with integrity you can be pretty sure what she tells you will be consistent with her aims as a priest. In many cases that includes enlisting as many more believers as possible. The goal of science is to understand the empirical world. The goal of religion is institutional. If you must be dependent upon experts, science is far preferable.
|
