The Instigator
Gabriel7159
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
junior_dominator
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The importance of science and religion

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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: 8/16/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,110 times Debate No: 36731
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Gabriel7159

Pro

Which has benefited mankind more? Religion or science? Many would agree that science has due to the fact that religion has spawned wars and disagreements across the globe when we can all agree on science because it is a common ground for curiosity among everyone. But...where would science be without religion? Without religion, most scientific studies over the years would have nothing to argue with, thus replacing faith with more theories and even more questions with no answers. This would eventually lead to confusion and misunderstanding of why such theories or studies are really necessary. We think we know this.....now what? Religion kept order and moral standpoints for everyone in the past and it has been tradition ever since. The Church has played major roles in government and politics because the Church still believes in order and peace. It is the intolerant people that do not respect this code and ignore their conscience. Okay, I just had to get that clear out of the way. Just an example of science disproving religion is Aristotle vs. Copernicus. Aristotle believes that stars were heavenly bodies located beyond our solar system. Copernicus later challenged this theory along with a more important, but not very relative to my case, aspect of the theory not to be proved until later by Galileo after an advancement in technology.(Hence, science is important!) The Church and all of its followers finally could gaze up at the stars and wonder; "What else could be a lie?". It's a powerful question but a simple one to understand. Religion helped advance great philosophers in their takes on life. Maybe life is not about knowing, it's about understanding. This is faith. This is science. This is what life will always be like and it's impossible to change it.
junior_dominator

Con

Definitions:
Science - a system that builds and organizes knowledge concerned with the physical world in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
http://dictionary.reference.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Religion - "an organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to the supernatural, and to spirituality"
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
http://dictionary.reference.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Science has benefited mankind more due to the technological innovations and knowledge that it allows us to use in everyday life.
My opponent argues in his opening that we need religion for the keeping of order and morals, even though this is not necessarily true. Morals and order can be kept without religion guiding our paths, as this is the purpose of government. Religion has played a role in a government and politics before, and still does today, but that does not mean that it needs to be in our systems of government in order for us to make choices concerning society. In fact, throughout history, the meddling of religion with government has caused many sufferings in the affairs of everyday people.
Even though religion has helped natural philosophers in their scientific efforts, that does not mean religion is better than science. As science relies on tests and evidence to build knowledge. It differs greatly from religion, which relies on beliefs that do not rely on what can be tested.
Maybe life isn't about anything, but if it is, science will show us what's going on. Something religion cannot be relied upon for.
Debate Round No. 1
Gabriel7159

Pro

As you are already well aware, science is needed for progress. It is proven in economics as much as it is for anything else. Religion is like this in a way. Human progression is spurred by a purpose; a common purpose that people drive towards for the same reason. Sure science is a purpose in itself but I bet we could never find OUR purpose through science. It is inevitable that we cannot, but it is in our blood that we strive to find answers. Where does religion come into play here? It is the one thing that any person can rely on to keep faith in discovery and reason as much as, if not more, than science. I agree with you on your reason why government has kept religion out of its way(I've taken AP government and politics), but you cannot use that as an excuse why religion isn't needed for order. The proof is in other countries. Why do we have freedom of religion? I think you know why. Look around, there are thousands of protestors fighting for their right to practice their religion every day because they need it. It fulfills them and gives them a reason to live. Others who do not need religion in their lives are never going to find a purpose and reach that peace of mind. Just know I am not against atheists or prejudice in any way.
junior_dominator

Con

junior_dominator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Gabriel7159

Pro

Gabriel7159 forfeited this round.
junior_dominator

Con

I would first like to apologize to my opponent and the voters for missing a round. My opponent skipped his round as well, so I will progress to his Round 2 argument.

Definitions:
faith - complete confidence or trust in something(1)
belief - an acceptance that something is true or exists(2)

You pose that human progress is stimulated by some sort of purpose. In this, you are very unspecific of what that purpose is, and you even call it a common purpose among all people. You are under the belief that people have a purpose in this world beyond living, or any purpose at all. There is no absolute purpose for which we are prescribed as, for the most part, it is defined by the individual, who then contributes to the commons, and in this way we could define a common purpose. It would only be an approximation.

In fact, science is the best way to find our purpose, as it allows us to change the world around us. It is what allows for social progress. Religion does this in minute ways, whereas science can provide massive changes in what we do and how we act. If anything, it is subjective to say that religion is, "the one thing that any person can rely on to keep faith in discovery and reason as much as, if not more, than science." For many people, they need not rely on faith to believe in discovery, as it is happening all the time in many places on earth.

We have freedom of religion to prevent one religion from oppressing another religion. Even then, oppression of others faiths still occurs.

You state that those without religion we will not find a purpose and peace of mind. This is arguably false, as religion is not a requirement to have purpose or peace of mind within ones life. If there is faith in a religion, this does not make it more significant than the testing of theories concerning our world. We need science because of the benefits which it brings and religion lacks. Without science and religion, I would be able to communicate at approximately the speed of light with another person a thousand miles away. I would be ignorant and in the dark, with little knowledge of my surroundings. With religion but without science, we would be in a similar situation to the above depicted. We would know very little about the universe and it's workings.

Thank you for participating in this debate. I once again apologize for missing round 2 and I wish all a happy day.

(1)http://en.wikipedia.org...
(2)http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by junior_dominator 3 years ago
junior_dominator
I'd like to apologize for forfeiting the previous round, I completely forget to answer my opponent. I have no doubt that will do me harm with the voters, but I propose to Gabriel7159 that for the final round we do closing statements/final refutations to reinforce our arguments.
Posted by MysticEgg 3 years ago
MysticEgg
Well, this should be easy for dominates to win. But if he loses - I challenge Gabriel7159 to a (kind of) re-match! I mean, it's not really a re-match as I've not actually debated you before; but you know what I mean!
Posted by Gabriel7159 3 years ago
Gabriel7159
No, you're right. I'm supporting religion in my argument. Sorry I haven't made it clear, I thought it was implied.
Posted by junior_dominator 3 years ago
junior_dominator
Ok, so I am assuming that you are choosing religion for your argument, as that is what it seems you favor in your opening statement. You do not specifically state this however, so please tell me if I'm wrong.
No votes have been placed for this debate.