3 ms·

>a veneer of science instead of religion. Science is some people religion nowadays

DonHopkins 3y ago
Except science isn't based on lies and deception, doesn't ignore self contradictions and false beliefs, is evidence based, is falsifiable, changes when new facts come in, and corrects mistakes when they're found. Other than that, you don't deserve to use computers, networks, electricity, radio, cell phones, AI, room temperature superconductors, cars, air conditioning, mathematics, logic, antibiotics, or medicine, if you falsely believe science is a religion. But if you're into religion, then logical consistency and truth seeking isn't your thing anyway, so you probably do hypocritically enjoy all the benefits and convenience of science anyway, while believing in invisible ghosts and magic, without a shred of proof.
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  Preach, brother in faith!
  - DonHopkins 3y ago
    Prove me wrong.
    - jack_pp 3y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle
- dalmo3 3y ago
  > you don't deserve to use computers... If that's not sarcasm then you just proved GP's point.
- vacuity 3y ago
  > Except science isn't based on lies and deception, doesn't ignore self contradictions and false beliefs, is evidence based, is falsifiable, changes when new facts come in, and corrects mistakes when they're found. ...At its best. That's not uniform across different fields; "social sciences" such as psychology are inherently a lot less rigorous than, say, chemistry. Also, there have been a few recent HN headlines about prestigious researchers withdrawing publications due to accusations of fraud. Let's not get into confirmation bias, tribalism, and whatnot, OK? > But if you're into religion, then logical consistency and truth seeking isn't your thing anyway It depends. Some claims based on religious beliefs are falsiable and happen to be scientifically dubious. However, many things are more philosophical in nature and aren't examinable by science. It seems there's pretty good evidence that Jesus died and resurrected, if only because the Roman soldiers probably wouldn't obscure details that would damage the credibility of Jesus' religion. Does this mean God exists and is as is described in the Bible? No, not necessarily. But you'd do well to consider that "science" isn't the end-all be-all answer to the universe. "Science", as we often deviate significantly from the spirit of scientific inquiry, which still isn't the key to omniscience.
  - maleldil 3y ago
    > It seems there's pretty good evidence that Jesus died and resurrected What? What's the evidence that he resurrected?
    - vacuity 3y ago
      Well, Jesus of Nazareth probably died. There's also evidence that he was no longer in his tomb some time after. It seems that Roman soldiers could've reported foul play if they witnessed anything not fitting the "Jesus resurrected" narrative. Of course, perhaps there are key details that I'm missing or just aren't recorded in history. I wouldn't say Christianity is the one true way to live even if Jesus was confirmed to have resurrected, because the former isn't contingent on the latter.
fortyseven 3y ago
Don't cut yourself on that edge, bro.

Except science isn't based on lies and deception, doesn't ignore self contradictions and false beliefs, is evidence based, is falsifiable, changes when new facts come in, and corrects mistakes when they're found. Other than that, you don't deserve to use computers, networks, electricity, radio, cell phones, AI, room temperature superconductors, cars, air conditioning, mathematics, logic, antibiotics, or medicine, if you falsely believe science is a religion. But if you're into religion, then logical consistency and truth seeking isn't your thing anyway, so you probably do hypocritically enjoy all the benefits and convenience of science anyway, while believing in invisible ghosts and magic, without a shred of proof.

carlosjobim 3y ago
Preach, brother in faith!
- DonHopkins 3y ago
  Prove me wrong.
  - jack_pp 3y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle
dalmo3 3y ago
> you don't deserve to use computers... If that's not sarcasm then you just proved GP's point.
vacuity 3y ago
> Except science isn't based on lies and deception, doesn't ignore self contradictions and false beliefs, is evidence based, is falsifiable, changes when new facts come in, and corrects mistakes when they're found. ...At its best. That's not uniform across different fields; "social sciences" such as psychology are inherently a lot less rigorous than, say, chemistry. Also, there have been a few recent HN headlines about prestigious researchers withdrawing publications due to accusations of fraud. Let's not get into confirmation bias, tribalism, and whatnot, OK? > But if you're into religion, then logical consistency and truth seeking isn't your thing anyway It depends. Some claims based on religious beliefs are falsiable and happen to be scientifically dubious. However, many things are more philosophical in nature and aren't examinable by science. It seems there's pretty good evidence that Jesus died and resurrected, if only because the Roman soldiers probably wouldn't obscure details that would damage the credibility of Jesus' religion. Does this mean God exists and is as is described in the Bible? No, not necessarily. But you'd do well to consider that "science" isn't the end-all be-all answer to the universe. "Science", as we often deviate significantly from the spirit of scientific inquiry, which still isn't the key to omniscience.
- maleldil 3y ago
  > It seems there's pretty good evidence that Jesus died and resurrected What? What's the evidence that he resurrected?
  - vacuity 3y ago
    Well, Jesus of Nazareth probably died. There's also evidence that he was no longer in his tomb some time after. It seems that Roman soldiers could've reported foul play if they witnessed anything not fitting the "Jesus resurrected" narrative. Of course, perhaps there are key details that I'm missing or just aren't recorded in history. I wouldn't say Christianity is the one true way to live even if Jesus was confirmed to have resurrected, because the former isn't contingent on the latter.

fortyseven 3y ago

Don't cut yourself on that edge, bro.