My Dying Bride Forum

Take from me the crown of sympathy...

Religion vs Science

Discuss books, paintings, thoughts and more.

Which, if any, do you subscribe to?

Science
34
61%
Religion
2
4%
Both in conjunction
10
18%
Neither
10
18%
 
Total votes : 56

Postby m0rtys » Sun Aug 10, 2008 6:09 pm

I think it will be intersting to have the specific debate of science vs religion

Religion and science seem as if they're opposing forces, thats why a debate on the matter is always a lively one..

Religion on the most basic level requires faith where as science requires doubt.
what is reality when you're always lost in your dreams.
m0rtysUser avatar
Darkness Adept
Darkness Adept
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 7:17 pm
Location: beirut,Lebanon

Postby xska2 » Sun Aug 10, 2008 7:29 pm

Neither, because of shortcomings of both.
Image
xska2
Doom Apprentice
Doom Apprentice
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 1:10 am
Location: London, UK

Postby MySanityDoesFly » Sun Aug 10, 2008 9:15 pm

I went for science, which beats religion every time.

However, science can only take us so far. Then again, the science is out there to take us further. We just haven't discovered it yet.
MySanityDoesFlyUser avatar
Ancient Doomster
Ancient Doomster
 
Posts: 6085
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 10:31 pm
Location: Liverpool, England

Postby Frankenstein » Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:22 am

I chose science as I'm not remotely religious, and throughout the centuries religions have depicted that which is new and progressive as evil. I think it is far more beneficial to harness the curiosity of human nature than it is to be held back by fear of the unknown.
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

http://droneslut.bandcamp.com
FrankensteinUser avatar
Darkness Adept
Darkness Adept
 
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 3:36 pm
Location: England

Postby PieceOfArt » Tue Aug 12, 2008 10:04 am

The way I see it religion and science mix just fine. Of course, that depends on what you believe. Personally I think there might be some "higher being" that doesn't interfere with any scientific theories. Well, except that its existence never can be scientificly proven...
I see no contradiction to believe in a "creator" if you say "the creator chose whichever way science finds most likely".

xska2 wrote:Neither, because of shortcomings of both.

Que? You are welcome to explain that a little further.
PieceOfArtUser avatar
Metal Acolyte
Metal Acolyte
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Go figure!

Postby xska2 » Tue Aug 12, 2008 1:12 pm

Que? You are welcome to explain that a little further.


I mean something similar to what you have said, as in "mix of science and religion" but maybe in a more negative way.

What if we "remove" everything that is science and remove everything that is religion - it is quite probable that it will become possible to see something else which is being obstructed by dogmatics of both. Of course it would be stupid to defy science (religious fanatics), or defy religion (scientific fanatics) because of their impact on our history and our current way of life - they are the basis of our society.

I think that in order to actually get beyond confrontation and antagonism both of them need to die in their current form to be replaced with something else.
Image
xska2
Doom Apprentice
Doom Apprentice
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 1:10 am
Location: London, UK

Postby God Destroyer » Tue Aug 12, 2008 10:15 pm

both... I think that religion complete the science...and the science complete the religion..in different ways..
There is no god but ALLAH...
أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله و أشهد أن محمداً رسول الله
God DestroyerUser avatar
Metal Acolyte
Metal Acolyte
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 1:53 pm
Location: arabian

Postby J1 » Wed Aug 13, 2008 9:59 am

Cool, a science vs. religion debate :)

I answered science, although I would like to slightly amend that to "science and philosophy". The fact of the matter is that where science, philosophy and religion disagree on the way the universe works, science usually has the facts on its side, philosophy has logic on its side, whereas religion has little to show for its position except a leap of faith based on scripture, dogma and a lot of twisted rhetoric.

Religious people tend to attack straw men like "science does not have all the answers" (nobody claimed that it does, and, for that matter, neither does religion). And we have seen in the past that as science progresses, religion retreats. The weather was the domain of god until science came up with theories about how climate works. The creation of man was the domain of god until science showed how evolution works. Religion has been marginalized to the role of "stop gap" explanation for everything we do not (yet!) have a scientific explanation for.

Of course it is possible that some higher being exists. Science can not disprove that. But allow me to quote a famous bit by Bertand Russell that is relevant to this observation:

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."

So for me, personally, science and philosophy together completely and utterly make religion obsolete as far as factual truth goes.

Regardless of truth, religion is, of course, an important cultural phenomenon, but whether or not it is a desirable cultural phenomenon is also doubtful. Given the amount of violence, bigotry and human suffering inherent in most religious systems, I'd say we might be better off without it.
"We have art that we do not die of the truth"
             -- Friedrich Nietzsche
.
Recently played:
Image
J1User avatar
Metal Acolyte
Metal Acolyte
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 9:54 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby Aylin Black » Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:11 am

MySanityDoesFly wrote:I went for science, which beats religion every time.

However, science can only take us so far. Then again, the science is out there to take us further. We just haven't discovered it yet.


Don't be so sure it beats religion every time.
Scientists answered to so many complicated and complex questions yet the can't answer this one: How come the elements of the universe "act' in such organized chaos...?
~Lily
Being The Cunt of Darkness since October 2006.

"I am an Anne Rice novel came to life"

MDB tribute project: email torturetonal@gmail.com
Aylin BlackUser avatar
Arch Melancholist
Arch Melancholist
 
Posts: 2200
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 6:33 pm
Location: Romania(my buddy Dracula loves you guys)

Postby PieceOfArt » Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:20 am

Aylin Black wrote:
MySanityDoesFly wrote:I went for science, which beats religion every time.

However, science can only take us so far. Then again, the science is out there to take us further. We just haven't discovered it yet.


Don't be so sure it beats religion every time.
Scientists answered to so many complicated and complex questions yet the can't answer this one: How come the elements of the universe "act' in such organized chaos...?

There are pretty good theories about that. Multiple universes etc.

The way I see it science and religion aren't to be compared, since they're two completely different things. (That's why I say they mix just fine) Religion can answer 'why' if the question is important to you, science can answer 'how'. Neither of them can answer both. You just have to choose which question you'd like to get an answer to. Religion should not even try to answer 'how'. Science for sure doesn't try to answer 'why'.
PieceOfArtUser avatar
Metal Acolyte
Metal Acolyte
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 8:10 pm
Location: Go figure!

Postby Aylin Black » Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:22 am

PieceOfArt wrote: Religion can answer 'why' if the question is important to you, science can answer 'how'. Neither of them can answer both. You just have to choose which question you'd like to get an answer to. Religion should not even try to answer 'how'. Science for sure doesn't try to answer 'why'.


Clearly. We can't receive all the answers from only one source. It would be too easy and things are never easy
~Lily
Being The Cunt of Darkness since October 2006.

"I am an Anne Rice novel came to life"

MDB tribute project: email torturetonal@gmail.com
Aylin BlackUser avatar
Arch Melancholist
Arch Melancholist
 
Posts: 2200
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 6:33 pm
Location: Romania(my buddy Dracula loves you guys)

Postby Frits » Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:47 pm

I only believe what can be proved (or is it proven? My english sucks), so my vote goes to science. even though it has its shortcomings and I do like to write about fictional things, like unproved (unproven?) theories in the lyrics for my band.

The fact that there are so many different approaches and religious interpretations, shows that none of them contains any kind of truth. But some religions are used to base ones education on. I was raised the christian way, but I do not feel any kind of commitment to it, neither do I believe a word of the bible.
I Fail to find comfort in your pale cold eyes
FritsUser avatar
Metal Acolyte
Metal Acolyte
 
Posts: 252
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: Belgium

Postby Nu Sa'ar » Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:05 pm

Well, I relate more to science.

The problem of religion, in my advice, is that it should be a strictly personal matter, but in fact it is not, so the unfaithful can still be discrimined.
Loneliness aplenty spread before me
Nu Sa'arUser avatar
Doom Apprentice
Doom Apprentice
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 1:00 pm

Postby abronsius » Sat Dec 27, 2008 1:47 am

There should be no debate, as there is nothing to debate. Science is based on evidence; religion is based on belief. The evidence of science should stand, and it should be religion's objective to disprove science (which it cannot) not the other way around.
Lifetime is a mere second in dead tongue
abronsiusUser avatar
Doom Apprentice
Doom Apprentice
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 10:45 pm

Next

Return to Arts, Literature and Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron