The Instigator
Stupidape
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
WJKosacs
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

"Does God exist?" is a scientific question that should be taught in science class.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/19/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 571 times Debate No: 93884
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (0)

 

Stupidape

Pro

I think the question of "does God exist?" is a scientific question. The reason being is if God exists, this makes a profound difference in the way we view the universe. If God exists, this drastically changes what scientists should be looking for.

Therefore, the question of does God exist should be taught in science class. The approach should be logical, evidence based, and scientific as opposed to faith based and religious arguments. More precisely students should be taught the lack of evidence of God existing and that scientifically God does not exist. [1]

This may sound silly, but I think students who are taught both science and religion become confused in science class. "Gee, why aren't they teaching creationism?" I think the teacher should be required to tell the class that creationism is not scientific and instead is a faith based approach, ditto with intelligent design.

Same goes with the Big bang theory. [2] I know I was confused when I was taught the big bang theory, I was like "why aren't they teaching Adam and Even?" I'm sick of science classes paying too much respect to religion. Because, religion sure doesn't respect science.

As long as this issue isn't addressed, students will see science through a jaded eye. "Hahhaha the big bang theory is all wrong because God created the world differently." Religious students will not be able to take science seriously, and their grades will suffer. With grades suffering, so will the chances of scholarships, getting into better colleges, and desirable careers.


Thanks in advance to my opponent for accepting.

Sources
1. http://atheism.about.com...
2. http://science.nasa.gov...
WJKosacs

Con

While I understand what you're saying, I believe that science should only deal in facts and very well supported theories, not theological problems like the existence of God. God and whether or not he exists should be a question left in religion class (World religions, if available) since there is no way to scientifically prove anything about God. You see, God is a concept. It would be like trying to prove that nothing is a real thing. We can't understand or experience nothing, and so we can't prove it. We can't experience God in any tangible way, and since we don't have a time machine we can't know for absolute certain whether or not the world was created (Creation instead of formation would prove a God exists). So, since it is and will continue to be unprovable either way in the forseeable future, it should remain where it belongs. In a religion class.
Debate Round No. 1
Stupidape

Pro

I will defend my argument this round.

"While I understand what you're saying, I believe that science should only deal in facts and very well supported theories, not theological problems like the existence of God." WJKosacs

Here's the problem, you can add a religious or philosophical question to anything. If a religion sees frogs as holy, should we no longer be allowed to talk about frogs in biology class? The same goes for chairs, tables, rodents, and the human body. Imagine if we couldn't talk about how the heart worked because somebody made a religious claim. By making God taboo in science class we are allowing religion to gain some level of influence and respect over science. Impact, if religon and philosophy can impose upon science by claiming ordinary objects, animals, and people as religious, science can do the opposite, and claim the supernatural for science.

More importantly, this is a double standard. In the sense, we are respecting some religions in science class but not others. There are hundreds of religions out there. Many of which would view the moon, sun, and the Earth as Gods. Yet, we are allowed to talk freely about the existence of the moon. Nobody says "hey, don't talk about the moon leave that for religion!" Not only that but we talk about how scientifically the moon, sun, and Earth were formed. No, we don't respect those religions, instead we respect only a few mainly Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

Therefore, in science we need to either respect every religion and completely abandon biology and astronomy or respect none.

"We can't experience God in any tangible way"

Again, which God and which religion? If we are talking about the sun as God, yes then we can experience God in a tangible way. Since the sun's ray warm out bodies and provide light to play Pokemon Go. By the very doubts you express you show commitment to an incorporeal God. Yet, not every religion's God(s) are incorporeal. This is exactly what I am talking about. Students are entering science classes with religious bias that interferes with their learning. Impact, my opponent has shown religious bias furthering my point that we need to let go of religious bias to be truly open to science.

Furthermore, we can use science to track the incorporeal like ghosts. There are entire fields devoted to tracking ghosts and ESP (extra sensory perception). We can use evidence like placing various measurement devices and cameras in a location renowned for ghosts and see what happens. Impact, just because we have little to no knowledge on a subject, doesn't mean we can't use the scientific lens and modality of thinking to approach the problem. Thanks for continuing the debate.
WJKosacs

Con

When I said the first part, I was referring to things that don't actually affect us physically in everyday life. I don't care what religions say is sacred. Religious beliefs don't belong in science classes. If a religious person claims that (To use your examples) frogs, chairs, or the human body are holy, then it doesn't matter. Religious beliefs shouldn't effect someone's curriculum and what they're learning. The, once again, have no place in ANY sort of scientific evironment.

I agree we need to either respect every religion or respect none. Personally, I think that we shouldn't respect any of them.

When I said "God" I was referring mainly to mainstream religions, such as Christianity, Islam, and others of that kind. However, I cannot think of any religions that still exist today that worship tangible Gods. I would also like to mention that I have no religious bias. It is impossible for me to have it, because I'm an atheist.

Personally, I don't believe in ghosts, spirits, ESP, all that. The "science" behind that is all just so much woo. However, I do agree with the last point. Just because we don't know much about a subject doesn't mean we can't use the scientific method to learn more.
Debate Round No. 2
Stupidape

Pro

I see no reason we couldn't view questions about God though a scientific lens. Evolutionary psychology and ESP are two examples. Thanks for the debate.

http://plato.stanford.edu...
http://science.howstuffworks.com...
WJKosacs

Con

I suppose you could view God through a scientific lens, but it wouldn't accomplish much. You're welcome for the debate, and I'd like to thank you as well. It was very enjoyable.
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
No one voted, bless the Lord! What a stupid topic.
Posted by hldemi 1 year ago
hldemi
Bluecoffe join the club :D
Posted by Bluecoffe 1 year ago
Bluecoffe
I would say its not a scientific question by any standard since the idea cant be tested and proved or disproved. I would say this is more of a philosophical questions involving metaphysics. so why not have more philosophical classes in school :P
Posted by DavidMancke 1 year ago
DavidMancke
Is anyone going to mop the floor with this guy.

Tell you what, I will volunteer to show this idea is both not scientific and not scriptural.

Simply put, neither solid science or honest religion would make it a point to get the Almighty to show us some ID.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
there is no need to point out the stupidity of creationists, just hand them microphones.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
glue of theism is pretend and war
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
of course they know this.. they can never prove anything
Posted by hldemi 1 year ago
hldemi
I dont think that such proposition is a falsifiable one and therefore cannot be a scientific question. If God interferes on natural world then his actions can be observed by a means of scientific methods but the mere existence of supernatural being that is beyond space and time is a philosophical question at best.
Posted by missmedic 1 year ago
missmedic
"Does God exist?" is a scientific question that has been answered by science. To understand why "God does not exist" can be a legitimate scientific statement, it's important to understand what the statement means in the context of science. When a scientist says "God does not exist," they mean something similar to when they say "aether does not exist," "psychic powers do not exist," or "life does not exist on the moon." All such statements are casual short-hand for a more elaborate and technical statement:
"this alleged entity has no place in any scientific equations, plays no role in any scientific explanations, cannot be used to predict any events, does not describe any thing or force that has yet been detected, and there are no models of the universe in which its presence is either required, productive, or useful."
Posted by Stupidape 1 year ago
Stupidape
"its not about evidence.. and anyone can ask a question, whats your vague point" Vi spex

Religion isn't about evidence, but people don't know this. People can assume for decades there is plenty of scientific evidence that God exists. I feel that in more heavily religious areas students are afraid to ask such questions in science class, like does God exist and what scientific evidence is there for God?

Don't underestimate the power of feeling stupid and peer pressure.
No votes have been placed for this debate.