ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Education and Science»
  • Philosophy

Reasons Why Science is a Religion

Updated on August 10, 2015
Buildreps profile image

Mario Buildreps is a graduate engineer. Become aware of topics in a way you have never heard before.

Source

About Science in General

The question if science made the world a much better place, is debatable. Besides bringing comfort, it also brings more pollution and inequality. There are also aspects of modern science that increasingly resemble to a religion.

Scientific materialism promotes the claim that testing, verification and falsification of theories is the only sure path to knowledge. If something cannot be tested scientifically it is forever speculative. But is it?

Two philosophical questions that every scientist should ask:

  • Can experiment be placed above pure reason?
  • When something is proven mathematically, would that still require an experiment?

Mathematical knowledge should be placed above scientific knowledge. The reason for this is simple - science uses mathematics as the ultimate tool to describe the material world. With great success. Without mathematics, science would be cripple and blind.

Scientists made the human senses the criterion of what exists or not exists. They assert that reality must conform the prejudice of science. This makes science a believe system and not scientific at all.

Experimentalism

Scientific materialism only temporarily uses mathematics, to withdraw formulas that fit the outcome of experiments. To put it more simple: science verifies the higher with the lower. Verification of a mathematical theory by an experiment. Only then a theory is complete. This is the world upside down.

Scientific materialism will therefore never find true answers.

A mathematical truth is the ultimate truth. When an experiment shows other results than the mathematical equivalent, the experiment should be questioned, not the mathematical outcome. Materialistic science doesn't realize it is chasing errors by using flawy experiments. Mathematics is the foundation of knowledge, not science.

The truth presented by science is wrong precisely because it has philosophically preferred testing over pure mathematical reason. Any scientific theory can be overthrown by a newer theory because science is focused on the material world.

By neglecting the mental world as the basis of matter, science makes a dramatic error, which will make them replace their theories all the time by a newer version. Hopelessly failing to find the ultimate answer.

Most scientists adopt the ridiculous and absurd conclusion that mind is a product of matter. Therefore are all consistent scientific materialists atheists and/or agnostic.

Do You 'Believe' in the Big Bang?

See results

A Dead Universe

Scientific materialism says that testing of scientific theories is the only way to be certain of anything. Scientific theories that must be approved by the establishment are only 'right' to the extent to which they reflect empirical evidence.

But since no experiment can reveal unobservables (noumena) then the scientific approach automatically obeys a materialistic and empirical ideology and rules out idealism and strict rationalism.

Anything that cannot be tested experimentally is cast off to metaphysics or religion.

Humans have no Soul, because it is unproven. According to science the Universe is a dead place.

Worshipping the Lower Above the Higher

There is a striking similarity between Science and Abrahamism.

  • Science worships experiment above Mathematics and pure Reason. They worship the lower (materialism/experiment) and reject the higher (mental/philosophy/mathematics) as the ultimate answer.
  • Abrahamists worship the Demiurge (materialism/creator), a deity that is lower then the pure Spirit (mental/God), and they reject their own spirit as God.

These two similarities are not really surprising, because they both spring from the same origin - a world controlled by the elite and the ignorant establishment.

Humanity is kept stupid from pure reason, and this includes scientists.

Worshiping the Demiurge = worshiping Experimental Materialism = worshiping dogma's.

Life Would Spring From Dead Matter

The String-theory, hopefully called the Theory of Everything would provide scientists a long waited answer, similar to a prophet who bestows his craving disciples divine bliss.

According to science dead matter can be decomposed to tiny 1-dimensional strings. Vibrating strings that have no width only a tiny finite length. Why matter can be decomposed into tiny pieces, and then suddenly stops to be decomposable without sufficient reason, shows still a medieval mindset.

From countless dead vibrating strings, like in a biblical miracle the mind would arise. How is a mystery. Scientists show in this view they cannot seem to escape from the similarities with murmuring prophets, creating something from nothing.

Creating mind from dead matter is impossible. Everything IS Mind. Matter is a reflection of Mind, also called the Spirit or the Soul.

The Spirit does not require any strings or unwitting theories.

Universal Law of Gravitation

The most successful law science ever produced is the Universal Law of Gravitation. By using this law are engineers able to navigate satellites through space with surgical precision.

Gravity is a pure material law presented as a universal law. This law implies that gravity is a force between bodies that should behave in similar ways regardless of where you are in the Universe. That's quite an extrapolation we see here, and because it seems to work, it is assumed that it proofs to be true. That's the illusion that experiment provides us.

Where in the objects these laws are stored and how these forces transfer themselves remains a mystery. How does an apple 'know' how to fall? Silence...

Science only uses mathematics to describe a material world, not explaining it, and not really understanding it.

Already more than 300 years ago, Newton proposed, that two objects, no matter their mass, exert gravitational force toward one another.

This law obeys the following equation: Fg ∝ (m1 × m2) / d²

  • Where Fg is the gravitational force between the two objects, measured in Newtons.
  • m1 and m2 are the masses of the two objects.
  • d is the distance between the two objects.
  • ∝ means proportional.

Science only 'believed' in this law after it has been subjected to experimenting, thus relying on their senses instead of logic and reason. The Law of Gravitation is therefore incomplete.

The Big Bang Theory

One of the most ludicrous theories science ever produced is the Big Bang theory.

The Universe would have produced itself from nothing into something. While materialistic science has no ways to deal with nothing - Zero. Meaning that scientists who 'believe' in this kind of fairytales can join Abrahamists with their believe in miracles.

It has great similarities with the miraculous feeding in the Old Testament. It must have inspired scientists when they cobbled together the Big Bang Theory.

This 'scientific' theory, would explain how the universe arrived at its present state. Relying and believing what their senses told them Hubble, Lemaitre, Einstein, and many other scientists believe the Big Bang theory postulates that the universe emerged 13.7 billion years ago with a Big Explosion out of materialistic nothing.

Scientists say that scientific laws break down in the singularity, that is, before the Big Bang. So...before the Big Bang there were no laws...they say. Of course. That shows that science tries to define the truth from a materialistic point of view, and that results in the most ludicrous theories. Theories they actually believe in.

Evolution and Natural Selection

According to most scientists all life on Earth has a common ancestor. All life on Earth would have started from something as Trilobites. This is not totally illogical though, regarded from the point of view that all life evolves cyclic into higher states of conscious awareness.

But the believe that live evolves randomly is so utterly primitive, that it's hard to believe that any rationalist can support this theory.

Darwin knew he had a huge problem in his theory The Origin of Species. That was the 'Cambrian Explosion', a dense concentration of species in a particular layer. But Darwin 'believed' this problem would be solved in the future, as scientists would find more even distributions of species through the earth's layers, that would support his ideas.

Up to this day evidence for Darwin's theory is never found.

Meaning that the theory of Darwin is not scientifically and based upon faith, preoccupations, assumptions and hope.

And that's precisely the definition of a religion. Materialistic science originated from Abrahamism, is sensory oriented and is therefore irrational.

Source

Theory of General Relativity

Einstein's theory of general relativity claims that space and time are not absolute and that gravity is not simply a force applied to an object or mass. Gravity associated with mass would curve space and time around the mass of the objects.

This has consequences for the Newtonian theory. The representation of Newton's theory is conflicting with Einstein's. The mathematical equation of Newton happens to lead to the right outcome, at least in our Solar System, as far as we know.

Einstein's theory laid the theoretical foundations for black holes, that now may not exist afterall, according to Stephen Hawkins. Einstein 'believed' Black Holes were possible based upon his theory.

Einstein's theory is a mix of pure reason, experiment and observation. It still cannot be regarded as pure mathematical reason, and leans on the 'faith' that things are as they seem through our senses.

Relativity leads to the most absurd situations, and wants us to believe that the Universe is a crazy irrational place. But is it? No. What almost no one knows, is that Einstein knew, based upon new intuitive insights, at the end of his life that he was wrong. But no one listened to him anymore, like an arrow that was already launched from the arch.

The Big Bang

Source

Quantum Mechanics

Cherry on the cake is Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. With the introduction of this theory in 1927 science became only more confused.

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states that it is not possible to simultaneously know two properties of a particle. Only one of the two properties can be known - only the position of an electron or only the momentum of an electron. Not both at the same time.

This shows there is something wrong in the representation of matter as the basis of all existence. As if the Universe is an insane asylum. It precisely shows there is something underneath matter - and that is the Spirit.

Later, Niels Bohr explained this with the wave-particle duality. By posing that position is material and momentum a waveform, the problem seemed to be solved, laying the foundation for Quantum Mechanics, representing the Universe as a dead mechanical clockwork.

No matter how brilliant theoretical physics may seem in trying to solve the mysteries of the Universe, these are hopeless attempts that will be overthrown by other versions of theories, again, and again, and again... showing there's something wrong in the core...

There is no escape from a black hole in classical theory. Quantum theory, however, enables energy and information to escape from a black hole...The correct treatment, remains a mystery.

— Stephen Hawkins

Finally - There Are no Black Holes

Most surprising, Stephen Hawkins came recently with a new theory that Black Holes don't exist.

This proves that scientific theories are thrown over and over again, and therefore that the basics of materialistic science is incorrect. For about hundred years most people 'believed' in the existence of Black Holes. Now people must start to 'believe' in something else.

This is also one of the reasons that science will never find the Holy Grail - the theory of everything, because scientists worship matter and experimental proof, and reject the Spirit, because the Spirit can not be subjected to experiments.

Scientists will therefore always be confronted with mysteries, due to their materialistic logic and reason. Blind 'faith' in science is the only way to continue in this blind alley.

Ultimately did science originate from Abrahamism. It didn't yet escape irrationalism and conformism. Science is the Guru, and the scientists are its disciples.

True Science

The Spirit is the basis of everything, and everything is Spirit. From every Human being down to every stone or grain of sand. Everything has a Monad - a Soul.

This is the Holy Grail - the Theory of Everything as proven by Mathematics. Mathematics is the only true science.

The Theory of Everything is already provided by great philosophers and mathematics like Leibniz, Euler, Dirac, Fourier, Riemann, Teilhard, Kant, Nietzsche and many others.

The answers provided by these great thinkers are overpowered by the biased noise produced by the successful materialistic scientists.

Scientists made 'sensorialism' and experimentalism the criterion of what exists or not exists. This makes science a vulnerable believe system and no true science at all.


© 2015 by Buildreps

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      henk tuten 2 years ago

      In main lines I quite agree with you article

      'rationalism' is not more than a religion

      The scientific community needs more shocks like this

      have a look at: http://paradigm-shift-21st-century.nl/western-scie...

      or

      http://paradigm-shift-21st-century.nl/ratio-religi...

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      Thanks for your comment, Retrojoe. Good thinking. You're certainly about one thing; that our lives are not caused by astrology, but that you might derive certain aspects form the planets and stars, because there are parallels between them and our lives. That is a great analysis, and I don't see that you're creating a new religion. As above, so below - that is the parallel, and that is one of the 7 Universal laws of Hermetism.

    • retrojoe profile image

      Joseph Ritrovato 2 years ago from Vancouver, WA (nextdoor to Portland, OR)

      Most interesting Buildreps.. I have a friend who doesn't believe in religion, but he believes in science. I on the other hand, believe in a little of both. In other words, I don't believe in placing all my eggs in one basket...

      I wrote a similar article about whether astrology was a religion. Astrology too is loaded with dogmatic beliefs and methodology based in archaic thinking or untested theories. One example is the use of progressions to determine how life will unfold for an individual. To map out the future, the astrologer uses the positions of the planets for each day after birth to represent each year of a person's life. I don't buy it, never tested it, but I doubt it can be valid, so I don't use it. I feel the same way about hypothetical planets, but I have recently embraced the use of some asteroids to help determine locations of future earthquakes.

      Same goes for those who believe that an eclipse can relate to an earthquake that occurred a month before the eclipse. I know that in higher dimensions, past, present, and future may all be one time, but we are experiencing things materially with time split up and thus causes, followed by effects, are the result.

      Actually, I personally feel that legitimate astrological factors only parallel physical forces and aren't actually the cause of them, both being the result of universal factors. Does this mean that I am creating my own religion? Possibly.

      One thing that may relate to the discounted 'spirit' in scientific circles is my discovery that earthquakes of 6.8 magnitude or larger without a death toll tends to have less of a relationship to astrological factors than those with a significant death toll of say 50 or more deaths. In science, there should not be a relationship with death if there is no spirit. A typical scientist would thus label my findings as rubbish...

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      Thanks for your comment, Nell. No, I never looked at this, although I know it. I might take a look at it! Thanks for the tip.

    • Nell Rose profile image

      Nell Rose 2 years ago from England

      Hi, have you ever seen Down the rabbit hole/what the bleep? it's a scientific look at anomalous things that are taking science by storm, and lots of it is concerned with what we call psychic stuff, fascinating read, nell

    • f_hruz profile image

      f_hruz 2 years ago from Toronto, Ontario, Canada

      There is one special relation among all living things. It's called the food chain. Otherwise we have a great degree of mutual interdependence in nature, but humans have not learned enough about it, or we wouldn't have economic and educational systems globally, which keep creating ever greater concentration of wealth by using methods of extraction and the application of intelligence restricted among an impotent few.

      Good or bad science is still a product of the human mind, just like all forms of philosophy .... the problem is with humans not grasping the difference between science and art, or their phantasies and reality as imposed by nature!

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      f_hruz, thank you for your effort to respond to this Hub.

      Although I don't see your comment really an authentic attempt to refute my points, besides a typical atheistic view that perfectly reflects the scientific establishment. This establishment that works for the rich elite, not for you and the rest of the world. But you might not be aware of this, and that's understandable, because their agenda is not available on the internet.

      You may call Illuminism a religion. Illuminism is only available for those who are able to grasp the essence of it. Atheism can be regarded a religion as well, because they believe a human being is nothing more then a hunk of meat, which coincidentally is able to think. How is unknown.

      Let me state another thing that counts for many Atheists that have a skeptical view on anything besides science. Skepticism combined with lack of intelligence is a curse. This counts for many scientists. For those who lack the intelligence to think on their own, there is the Abramahamistic religions - they can immerse themselves in dogmas and mindlessly follow a prophet.

      Theoretically Illuminism could be available for the most intelligent 25% of the world population - the introvert thinkers, intuitors, calculators and sensors.

      The interesting similarity with Illuminism that you pose here is: "has to be the source of intelligence present within nature". This is about Illuminism. I'm sure you would like and understand what it is about (not trying to promote :)).

    • f_hruz profile image

      f_hruz 2 years ago from Toronto, Ontario, Canada

      Ahahaha - so long story short, the whole thing is just a book promotion with a lot of interesting bits of science included to introduce a religious aspect to the story?

      Scientific thought is the process of discovery and understanding reality based on the observation and interpretation of the forces of nature at work. Mathematics is a universal tool, and a scientific discipline in it's own right. All natural sciences have great relevance in understanding and interpreting the real world correctly. Serious advances in the theoretical fields of all sciences require a great degree of intelligence and a highly trained mind able to grasp the limits to reality and our rational world before going off the deep end, into irrationality and convoluted BS.

      For us humans to grasp the deeper nature of reality and how eloquently applied scientific thought can help us understand the objective world a bit better, gods, soles, spirits or other infantile religious ideas, are of no use to us!

      One aspect in this whole discovery process which is truly amazing, has to be the source of intelligence present within nature, which we are trying to study and discover.

      We know that all chemical elements distinguish each other by their molecular structure, so iron doesn't have to know it's not gold, and hydrogen is not carbon, but which natural properties impart to each object sufficient intelligence to be able to successfully exist according to the laws of nature and how does nature propagate intelligence for us to even notice and aspire for more of it as part of the permanent process of change, natural growth, human evolution and technological development?

      Just like resource optimization is now part of management science, the social sciences and applied psychology may start to focus a bit more on bringing about greater awareness of the value of rational thought and the application of scientific concepts in every day life ... :)

      http://youtu.be/VxEC1kU4moQ

    • Buildreps profile image
      Author

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      @Bill, thanks for you're always highly valued comments!

      @Trevor, thanks. I'm sure you're able to produce interesting articles about the Demiurge! I'm looking forward to them.

      @Austinstar, I fully agree with this wise view on science. Science can do far more for a better world.

    • Austinstar profile image

      Lela 2 years ago from Somewhere in the universe

      Since humans as a species will probably not last even as long as the dinosaurs did, I find the whole 'Big Bang' type theories to be rather useless. I think science should stop worrying about what happened billions of years ago and concentrate on how to improve our world.

    • Trevor Wallace profile image

      Trevor Wallace 2 years ago from Outside Houston, Tx

      Great article. I'm impressed that you managed to slip the Demiurge in there.

    • billybuc profile image

      Bill Holland 2 years ago from Olympia, WA

      Very creative...very logical...obviously, those two are not mutually exclusive. :)