jump to last post 1-9 of 9 discussions (55 posts)

Scientific Method is useless in religion and or philosophy. Isn’t it?

  1. 69
    paarsurreyposted 5 weeks ago

    As its name suggests it is useful in science only. It has not been designed for religion and or philosophy. Right? Please

    Regards

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

      It has been designed to find truth, and does so better than any other tool man has ever made.

      Is there truth in religion or philosophy?

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

        It is about degrees of truth and find Religion has only little truth that can apply to me today. Mankind has become far more advance than highlights from the Bronze age. We may point out many negative from living in today society. To live in the Bronze age would be like living in hell compared to today.

      2. 69
        paarsurreyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

        Scientific Method is a philosophical method. Isn't it? Please
        Regards

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

          No.  Google "scientific method" and you will find that it is a method to find evidence, and even more to find if conclusions drawn from evidence is true.

          If you want a philosophical method of finding truth, go to religion where truth is whatever you wish it to be.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image22
            Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

            Is philosophy a form of mental masturbation?

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

              Often times, yes, IMO.  Although it CAN be a very useful "tool" for understanding less concrete things - self, man, good vs evil, etc.

            2. jonnycomelately profile image87
              jonnycomelatelyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

              It can give satisfaction, I suppose.

          2. 69
            paarsurreyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

            One may like to read the following:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o … fic_method
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

            Scientific method was invented by philosophy, in fact it was first called philosophy and later named as science.
            Scientific Method has not gone under the mill of the "Scientific Method" to start with.

            Regards

            1. Castlepaloma profile image22
              Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

              For the beginnings of civilization it was Art first.

              Art is to please
              Religion is to fear
              Science is to observe
              Philosophy is to doubt

              1. 69
                paarsurreyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

                One may like to say that scientific method is the art of observing analytically the data in an effort to reconcile the problem in hand with the master nature.
                Religion is to fear lest one wrongs somebody unaware.
                For the beginnings of civilization it was Art first.
                Philosophy is to doubt only if a valid anomaly is observed else one has some abnormality that needs to be corrected.

                Please

                Regards

                1. Castlepaloma profile image22
                  Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

                  In the beginning of civilization art and philosophy rub shoulders. The most solid evidence of civilization is art going back 100,000 years and longer. Religion had it's boom about 5,000 years ago. I think science is the most recent boom in the turn of human history of events.

    2. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

      Science evolved out of religion.
      All scientists were either priests or monks for thousands of years.
      Even now (after an historically brief time of some atheism) scientists are once again turning to God.
      Science is firmly rooted in religion.
      Read up about the history of science.
      PS that goes doubly with all philosophy as well.

      1. 69
        paarsurreyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

        I agree with one.
        Mathematics is the mother of science, and philosophy is the mother of Mathematics. Religion never interferes with science or any secular discipline as these are all in the domain of temporal, material and physical. Religion is about ethical, moral and spiritual domains and is concerned with the life in hereafter.
        There is no conflict in  secular disciplines or disciplines of science and between the religion.
        No prophet/messenger of G-d or founder of truthful religion spoke against science or scientists.
        Please

        Regards

      2. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

        No, science did not evolve out of religion.  Coming after religion does not mean coming out of it.

        Nor were scientists priests for thousands of years: science itself has not existed for thousands of years.

        Scientists are not turning to god as a group or even as individuals...in matters of science.  Personal beliefs, yes, but science.

        So science is not rooted at all in religion, let alone firmly.  Attempts to make religion sound more "professional" by throwing in the term "science" or saying that science is religion or vice versa are futile.  The two have a world of difference between them.

        1. Castlepaloma profile image22
          Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

          So science proves Religion and each God is Right. Stop 90% of the world wars, right now!!!!
          Since science has proven every God is right , there is no need to kill anyone over it.

          1. psycheskinner profile image80
            psycheskinnerposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

            Sadly science did no such thing, and as Gods (as perceived by their followers) contradict each other (even the same God) they can't all be right.  They could potentially all be wrong.

            1. Castlepaloma profile image22
              Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

              My bet, it is the Jews are the only ones, that get to go to heaven. Satan is just too Greedy with a 100 billion people who ever lived here, with a permanent retirement plan of torture.

              1. psycheskinner profile image80
                psycheskinnerposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

                Which would be ironic as Jewish tradition place little emphasis on heaven and there is not firm orthodox position that it even exists.

          2. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

            Wilderness/Peeps
            You need to read some history and archaeology. Maybe you're spending too much time on HP and forgetting to study general knowledge?

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

              And perhaps you need to review the definition of science and the scientific method?  Science did not come from religion; if it had of religion would be based on the same things science is.

        2. jonnycomelately profile image87
          jonnycomelatelyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

          I disagree that "science is rooted in religion."  It seems that until human beings were willing to question, explore, discover, accept honestly what they saw and experienced, scientific research could not progress and, hence, ignorance persisted.

          Ignorance still pervades religion today.

      3. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
        Kathryn L Hillposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

        Can the scientific method be used for religion, philosophy and spirituality?
        A.) Religion:
        Religion is presented as results that are aligned with a previously constructed hypothesis.
        B.) Philosophy:
        Philosophy is dependent on the scientific method in that hypothesis must be backed up by what is verifiably true on a universal level.
        C.) Spirituality
        If the scientific method can be used for what is visible and concrete,
        It can also be used for what is invisible and non-concrete.
        Example:
        Question: How do you perceive what exists on an  i n v i s i b l e  level?
        Background search: God is known as a spirit being according to the Bible.
        Hypothesis: It is well known that humans have a sixth sense, as animals do. Since God is spirit, God can be perceived/sensed with the sixth sense of extra-sensory perception.
        Experimentation: One first must discover through use/practice if this sixth sense is real.
        Results: God is directly perceived according to individual motivation and ability to intuit God.

        (something like that lol)

        1. Castlepaloma profile image22
          Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

          If animals have this sixth sense of this 99% in visible God ((, opposite of concrete

        2. jonnycomelately profile image87
          jonnycomelatelyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

          If it was all like that, maybe every religion could be a prrrfect fit.  But so much desired outcome is retained in religion that the truth can rarely be approach - at least that's the way I see it.

        3. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

          The scientific method requires that observations and experiments be repeatable by others.  It also requires that others do those experiments and make those observations (called peer review) before a hypothesis is considered factual.

          No, the imagined "sixth sense" cannot be used as there IS no such thing.

          So no, the scientific method cannot be used in either religion or philosophy as neither uses experimentation or observation that can be reproduced by anyone else.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
            Kathryn L Hillposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

            Good to know! Now lets never discuss this EVER again!!!!

            1. Castlepaloma profile image22
              Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

              Keep a third eye on him.

            2. jonnycomelately profile image87
              jonnycomelatelyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

              Hahaha....now you are asking for miracles, Kathryn and I don't think that is within the rules for HP
              wink

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                Kathryn L Hillposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

                HP Rule 106: Use of third eye prohibited.
                HP Rule 107: No miracles.
                lol

          2. Oztinato profile image82
            Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

            I disagree. Others can certainly get on their knees and humbly pray and have the same experience.
            Also Godel's Incompleteness Theorem proves that all scientific results are imperfect and lead to further questions, forever. Hawking has a free online essay defending Godel's Incompleteness Theorem.

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

              "Others can certainly get on their knees and humbly pray and have the same experience."

              Ah, but they don't.  They get a different message entirely much of the time.The original "experience" thus cannot be verified.

              Yes, yes.  I know.  Always back to Godel and his incorrect assumptions.  Should you ever bother to actually read and understand his work you will see that as well as anyone else.  Tell me - what has Hawking and others had to say about the axioms Godel uses to form his conclusions with?  Not his logic - his axioms?

    3. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago

      And try to Google Godel's God theorem plus the holographic universe plus string theory while you're at it. O that's right "you can't find it". Hullo!!!

    4. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago

      Read some history so you can have a real conversation. You can't make history up as you go.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

        Christian science is kind of an oxymoron

        1. They have the world largest creationism museum showing that earth began 6000 years ago. Where man and dinosaurs co existed and played together, nobody got eaten.

        2. Flintstones documentary with a Christmas special.

        3 Raqael welch and dinosaurs, eye candy.
        My favorite, I fell for church then asked too many questions and got kicked out.

        1. Oztinato profile image82
          Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

          Stop limiting your knowledge to a stereotype of religion as right wing fundamentalists from the back woods. There are many religions out there.
          Have a look at some Indigenous religions for example from South America or the atheist's favorite religion Buddhism or Hinduism. Go read some books.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image22
            Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

            My brother is a pastor and I have been to 100 countries. Also build some museum human history displays. That gives me a little more heads up about Religion than most people.

            Was just last speaking about OT and NT. Where half of Americans don't know what book is older. Along with thinking the earth is less than 10,000 years old.

            Indigenous people speak of creators , not God. Based on nature, not a set of impossible rules to follow. Taoism is based on nature also, nature is my Religion too. Supernatural God belongs in the same category as Hollywood super hero's.

            Atheist can except Buddhism, where Hinduism has 30 million too many Gods for them..

          2. jonnycomelately profile image87
            jonnycomelatelyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

            In some cultures, Buddhism has become their religion, displaying so many rituals, ceremonies, chanting, etc.  All fine, in those cultures, because it seems to satisfy their cravings for certainty and stability.

            But the Buddhist Way transcends religion, totally.  It's a personal, inward exploration, appropriate for anyone, regardless of religious leanings or philosophy.  Oz, you might care to try it.   Vipassana is a good starting point.

            1. Oztinato profile image82
              Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

              It's a religion bro. I have wide experience and have enjoyed practicing several forms of bhuddist religion for many years. I am inter-religious remember?my goldfish memory friend?

              1. jonnycomelately profile image87
                jonnycomelatelyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

                Ok Bro.  Since you have been experiencing various forms of the Buddhist Religion it seems you have yet to try the Buddhist Way - (8-fold path).
                As I understand it, that perpetual seeking is what you get on the Outward journey.  Better to try the Inward journey.   But don't take my word for it.  Your Llfe is your life.

                1. Oztinato profile image82
                  Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

                  I meditate regularly. That's the inward journey.
                  Bhuddist and hindu meditations have similarities. Learn to enjoy the differences between cultures and their fascinating religions.

                  1. Castlepaloma profile image22
                    Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

                    I can find talking about polar swims and naked bungee jumping is fun, yet have no desire to try it.
                    The arckwardness of trying out a new Religion would be that much more extreme.

    5. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago

      The Hindus believe we are all God hence there are now 6 billion plus.
      If you have such experiences simply stop limiting your comments to a stereotype of right wing Christian and your comments will be wiser. Why refer  stereotypes if you have greater knowledge? Use your knowledge.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

        There is a left wing Christians, if two wings never come together your lost in space.

        If sons of God are Giants, then you have 7 headed dragon in hell, talking snake and donkey, virgin birth, and bald headed priest who  shreds children to death by a grizzly bear. You got nightmares, not world common knowledge.

      2. jonnycomelately profile image87
        jonnycomelatelyposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

        If there are 6 trillion waves/wavelets upon the ocean, they all constitute the Ocean.

        1. Castlepaloma profile image22
          Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

          If everyone was God in the Hinduism Religion. I would join that Religion for the sake of world peace.

    6. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago

      In other words your knowledge is paper thin and negligible.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 5 weeks ago in reply to this

        If the whole Universal knowledge is in one king James of dozens of hand me down hearsay. You need to read a hell alot more book. Before beginning to understand first hand sensible experiences.

    7. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
      Kathryn L Hillposted 5 weeks ago
    8. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago

      It's Godel's "Incompleteness Theorem " not his God theorem. Hawking as I've said is supportive of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem.  Godel has many theorems one of which recently proved time travel. Because I read and study I'm aware. Try it one day.

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 4 weeks ago in reply to this

        "Also Godel's Incompleteness Theorem proves that all scientific results are imperfect and lead to further questions, forever"

        "The first incompleteness theorem states that no consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an effective procedure (i.e., an algorithm) is capable of proving all truths about the arithmetic of the natural numbers. For any such formal system, there will always be statements about the natural numbers that are true, but that are unprovable within the system."

        You don't see a small difference in the two statements (one from you and one from wikipedia)?  As in one deals ony with arithmetic and one with all possible scientific discoveries?  Oz, you really, really, need to read better!

    9. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 5 weeks ago

      Castle
      There is a university level subject called comparative religion. No one has a breakdown when studying it. Having an open mind is actually good for people.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 4 weeks ago in reply to this

        I can not imagine anything more closed minded than a book making statements like it is the book of Universal truth and knowledge. Plus the creator of the Universe and if you don't ultimately love me (Yahweh)

        If you don't love Yahweh with all your heart, you know where you are going.

    10. Oztinato profile image82
      Oztinatoposted 4 weeks ago

      I can: not studying stuff.
      "Seperate the chaff from the grain" as the saying goes. Yes jws and those who preach intolerance need to be seen in context. That's what study is.
      If we limit our studies to intolerant right wingers then that's what we'll see.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 4 weeks ago in reply to this

        I respect and except all people and their group. Yet never will be able to understand Religion, war, hell, and environmental destruction. Plus interferences in what people put into our body and adult sexual affairs.

        It takes a Religious person to over focus on those things.

     
    working