|
Zonie63 -> RE: Think there is a god and what is your evidence? (2/8/2012 12:01:55 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GotSteel
quote:
ORIGINAL: Yachtie
Evidence of what nature? Science has no evidence to disprove God. Theists have evidence, though not concrete, to establish a basis for belief. It's amusing that atheists dismiss that which is for that which is not.
Our civilization used to be into a model of reality where the supernatural was everywhere, everything down to our very thoughts had a supernatural cause. But then we started paying closer attention to detail and noticed that anecdotal evidence and popular opinion were actually terrible forms of evidence. We slowly came up with a methodology which demonstrably gives us progressively more accurate knowledge about our reality. A method under which naturalism is continually being confirmed, expanding and replacing supernatural world views.
Our most knowledgeable when it comes to the ins and outs of reality once were largely theists, that's no longer the case. Scientists have overwhelmingly moved away from theism as part of their world view. When it comes to physicists only 22% are theists. The people most familiar and able to understand how our universe actually works overwhelmingly would not agree that the evidence leads to your position.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_religion_and_science#Studies_of_scientists.27_belief_in_God
The evidence just isn't on your side. That's where all the talk of faith when asked for evidence comes from and why attacking science has become so popular.
That wikipedia article was interesting.
quote:
Many studies have been conducted in the United States and have generally found that scientists are less likely to believe in God than are the rest of the population. Precise definitions and statistics vary, but generally about 1/3 are atheists, 1/3 agnostic, and 1/3 have some belief in God (although some might be deistic, for example).[66][90][91] This is in contrast to the more than roughly 3/4 of the general population that believe in some God in the United States. Belief also varies by field: psychologists, physicists and engineers are less likely to believe in God than mathematicians, biologists and chemists.[92][93] Doctors in the United States are much more likely to believe in God (76%).[94]
Some of the most recent research into scientists' self reported belief in God is discussed by Professor Elaine Howard Ecklund. Some of her most interesting findings were that scientist-believers generally considered themselves "religious liberals" (not fundamentalists), and that their religion did not change the way they did science, but rather the way they reflected on its implications. Ecklund also discusses how there is a stigma against belief in God in the professional science community, which may have contributed to underrepresentation of religious voices in the field.[95]
It's interesting that 76% of doctors are noted as much more likely to believe in God, and that belief in God tends to vary by individual fields.
I don't think there has to be a conflict between science and religion, although historically, it's been the religionists who create the conflict more than the scientists. Strictly speaking, there's nothing about religion which explicitly says that they must oppose the teaching of evolution or that the Sun is at the center of the Solar System. That's something that they just make up out of the blue without any rhyme or reason, nor even any religious justification.
But likewise, I don't think there's anything unscientific if one chooses to believe or remains open to belief systems, as long as they don't allow their personal beliefs (or non-beliefs, whichever the case may be) to impede their science. It was mentioned in the Wiki article that "there is a stigma against belief in God in the professional science community." If this is true, then it would be an indication that some scientists are allowing their personal feelings to affect their science, which would be profoundly unscientific.
|
|
|
|
