6 ms·

Not faith in the religious sense, no. I get the sense you are overloading the term to make a false equivalence to bolster religious faith as valid. It’s not. F

Not faith in the religious sense, no. I get the sense you are overloading the term to make a false equivalence to bolster religious faith as valid. It’s not. Faith in science, even basic assumptions on fundamental axioms, is grounded in reality .

za3faran 3y ago
> Faith in science, even basic assumptions on fundamental axioms, is grounded in reality . So is faith in established, proven, and documented religious materials with a chain of narration (Isnad in Arabic).
Supermancho 3y ago
> I get the sense you are overloading the term to make a false equivalence to bolster religious faith I think this is a poor argument. It's swinging the "no true scotsman" because it's convenient to what you want to define. Faith in science and faith in another religion is not a false equivalence. Religion is the poorly defined term. Science fits well within it. Ironically, this is a common holy war on HN.
- PrimeMcFly 3y ago
  A faith that stems from knowledge and a tradition of rigor is quite different from a faith that stems from indoctrination or a desire for there to be some kind of greater meaning to life.
  - tivert 3y ago
    > A faith that stems from knowledge and a tradition of rigor is quite different from a faith that stems from indoctrination or a desire for there to be some kind of greater meaning to life. You're making a false (and biased) distinction. You almost certainly have been indoctrinated into valuing the thing you label "rigor," and your faith in it stems from that indoctrination. Your position is just an obscured version of "my gods are the true ones, and all others are false or inferior, because my gods are mine."
    - Supermancho 3y ago
      It's a way of drawing a new line in the sand. There are plenty of religions that don't have indoctrination (all have rituals) or a desire to find a greater meaning. eg Abrahamic religions don't promote a search for greater meaning.
      - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
        Almost all people are religious because they were indoctrinated into it as kids.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        Supermancho 3y ago
        Teaching and indoctrination are different things. The keyword criticality is very common among many religious schools. There is a difference in rigor for those arguments, but they are allowed. This is why many people fall out of their ancestral religion.
        PrimeMcFly 3y ago
        > Teaching and indoctrination are different things. The keyword criticality is very common among many religious schools. Even if a religious school is teaching critical thinking regarding the religion, and I'm skeptical of that, the church (or equivalent) and parents likely are not.
    - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
      It's not false, and any bias is irrelevant since the distinction is accurate. People can be indoctrinated into science, I suppose, but more often it's something rational minds arrive at. The same is not true for religion. A rational adherence to science isn't a worship of "gods" it's the understanding that it's a rational approach to gaining knowledge and understanding the universe. 'gods' don't enter into it unless they are the subject of a hypothesis/theory/experiment.
swader999 3y ago
Reality...
alienicecream 3y ago
Faith in science is actually worse. At least religious faith dares to tell you something and asks that you have faith in it. Science tells you this is what is for the time being, until we know better, and there is no guarantee that we won't reach a limit to knowledge that we will not be able to pierce. With science you can count on one thing: you'll die before you know the fundamental truth.
- wredue 3y ago
  >with science you can count on one thing: you’ll die before you know the fundamental truth Now that’s a hilariously ironic take within a comment declaring religious faiths (belief absent evidence, meaning it’s impossible to “know its true”) superiority. That science tries not to deal in absolutes is a feature, not a bug. You’re looking at the pursuit of knowledge from an entirely incorrect perspective.

za3faran 3y ago

> Faith in science, even basic assumptions on fundamental axioms, is grounded in reality . So is faith in established, proven, and documented religious materials with a chain of narration (Isnad in Arabic).

Supermancho 3y ago

> I get the sense you are overloading the term to make a false equivalence to bolster religious faith I think this is a poor argument. It's swinging the "no true scotsman" because it's convenient to what you want to define. Faith in science and faith in another religion is not a false equivalence. Religion is the poorly defined term. Science fits well within it. Ironically, this is a common holy war on HN.

PrimeMcFly 3y ago
A faith that stems from knowledge and a tradition of rigor is quite different from a faith that stems from indoctrination or a desire for there to be some kind of greater meaning to life.
- tivert 3y ago
  > A faith that stems from knowledge and a tradition of rigor is quite different from a faith that stems from indoctrination or a desire for there to be some kind of greater meaning to life. You're making a false (and biased) distinction. You almost certainly have been indoctrinated into valuing the thing you label "rigor," and your faith in it stems from that indoctrination. Your position is just an obscured version of "my gods are the true ones, and all others are false or inferior, because my gods are mine."
  - Supermancho 3y ago
    It's a way of drawing a new line in the sand. There are plenty of religions that don't have indoctrination (all have rituals) or a desire to find a greater meaning. eg Abrahamic religions don't promote a search for greater meaning.
    - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
      Almost all people are religious because they were indoctrinated into it as kids.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - Supermancho 3y ago
        Teaching and indoctrination are different things. The keyword criticality is very common among many religious schools. There is a difference in rigor for those arguments, but they are allowed. This is why many people fall out of their ancestral religion.
        PrimeMcFly 3y ago
        > Teaching and indoctrination are different things. The keyword criticality is very common among many religious schools. Even if a religious school is teaching critical thinking regarding the religion, and I'm skeptical of that, the church (or equivalent) and parents likely are not.
  - PrimeMcFly 3y ago
    It's not false, and any bias is irrelevant since the distinction is accurate. People can be indoctrinated into science, I suppose, but more often it's something rational minds arrive at. The same is not true for religion. A rational adherence to science isn't a worship of "gods" it's the understanding that it's a rational approach to gaining knowledge and understanding the universe. 'gods' don't enter into it unless they are the subject of a hypothesis/theory/experiment.

swader999 3y ago

Reality...

alienicecream 3y ago

Faith in science is actually worse. At least religious faith dares to tell you something and asks that you have faith in it. Science tells you this is what is for the time being, until we know better, and there is no guarantee that we won't reach a limit to knowledge that we will not be able to pierce. With science you can count on one thing: you'll die before you know the fundamental truth.

wredue 3y ago
>with science you can count on one thing: you’ll die before you know the fundamental truth Now that’s a hilariously ironic take within a comment declaring religious faiths (belief absent evidence, meaning it’s impossible to “know its true”) superiority. That science tries not to deal in absolutes is a feature, not a bug. You’re looking at the pursuit of knowledge from an entirely incorrect perspective.