Quote:
Originally Posted by wig
Come on. You don't see a difference between a scientific theory (evolution, relativity, etc) and religious doctrine?
|
Yes. But I also see the commonalities of the two. Don't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wig
Science, as a method, admits where there are gaps. They don't fill gaps in with faith based beliefs. If there is a hypothesis for such a gap, then it is stated as such.
|
Yes, and as I said those hypothesis' are either
believed in or not. As in taken on faith. Really, if you don't have faith in your hypothesis what's the point?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wig
Religions, in general, place god as an explanation in these gaps. What are the gaps? Well, these are the places science has not yet acquired a theory. Religions offer no evidence, no predictions, no testable anything.
|
There again, that's why it's called
faith.
There's plenty beliefs on the scientific side of the argument that offer nothing physically testable or provable either. Go back in time far enough in the evolution of the world and the universe and at some point it all becomes speculation.
You're focused on the differences, while I am merely pointing out the what the two sides have in common. Both sides rely on a modicum of faith to complete the puzzle, not just one. In fact some people put so much faith in science and all it's theories that it becomes as much of a religion as religion is.