
March 15th, 2003, 11:43 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: [OT] Plato\'s Pub and Philosophical Society
Chronon:
We have _always_ had ethnic cleansing. This is nothing new.
Quote:
On the other hand, progress (the Enlightenment philosophes at work again - the same people for whom Catholicism was a superstition) in its modern usage is irrelevent to religion. Early Christianity, for example, eschewed the material in favor of the spiritual (the Papacy of the Medieval and Early Modern periods is another story) and would have scoffed at the importance of worldly progress. Saying that religion does not have progress is like saying you can't score goals in baseball. It simply does not apply.
|
My entire point was that the "faith" involved in believing in science is wholey unequivalent to believing in religion. That was only one example of how the "faith" is in no way equivalent.
Baron Munchausen :
Quote:
This is a fascinating argument. I see you keep repeating it so I have a question
|
It is only repeated because people keep missing my point. I have no choice but to reword it, in hopes that they can see it.
Quote:
Do you consider the concept of evolution to be science or faith?
|
As Andres said, the theory of evolution is based off of observed evidence, experimentation, etc. It is the model that best fits with the evidence and such, so it is the commonly accepted theory. If new accurate evidence surfaced that wholey contradicted evolution and pointed to something else, then the theory would be modified or replaced, as need be. Now take a religious example: creation. Creation is not based off of evidence or experimentation, it is based off of what [insert name of holy scripture here] says, period. If new accurate evidence comes out that contradicts the holy scripture, the evidence must be flawed. Religion is not subject to change of its major views in the way that science is. This is another part of how the "faith" involved in accepting religious and scientific views is wholely unrelated.
|