Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Why Scientism is Invalid

Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2013 11:27:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
There are many other types of evidence than those found in science. The atheist scientists here shouldn't believe in Abraham Lincoln being President or WW2 happening because no one has observable evidence of these things.
MikeNH
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2013 4:38:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Firstly, there IS observable evidence for WWII and that Abraham Lincoln existed, so I don't know what point you were trying to make there.. Secondly, what atheists are you talking to? I've never met another atheist that reject evidence that isn't "observable". I certainly don't. What's your point?
Drayson
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2013 7:17:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Sounds to me like you just don't understand science (no such thing as "scientism" by the way).

Tell me, if you go home one day and find a window smashed and forced open, your drawers open and emptied onto the floor, and most of your valuable possessions missing, what would you think?

After all, you can't claim "someone broke in and stole your things", because you weren't there and therefore couldn't observe that happening.
"I'm not saying I don't trust you...and I'm not saying I do. But I don't"

-Topper Harley
Sargon
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2013 8:13:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/21/2013 7:17:03 PM, Drayson wrote:
Sounds to me like you just don't understand science (no such thing as "scientism" by the way).

Tell me, if you go home one day and find a window smashed and forced open, your drawers open and emptied onto the floor, and most of your valuable possessions missing, what would you think?

After all, you can't claim "someone broke in and stole your things", because you weren't there and therefore couldn't observe that happening.

He's not attacking science. He's attacking the idea that science is the only way to truth by pointing out truths are established by means other than the scientific method. The idea that science determines truth is called "scientism", and yes, it is a word.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,927
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2013 8:20:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/21/2013 7:17:03 PM, Drayson wrote:
Sounds to me like you just don't understand science (no such thing as "scientism" by the way).


Yes, there is.

Tell me, if you go home one day and find a window smashed and forced open, your drawers open and emptied onto the floor, and most of your valuable possessions missing, what would you think?

After all, you can't claim "someone broke in and stole your things", because you weren't there and therefore couldn't observe that happening.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2013 8:56:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/21/2013 11:27:54 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
There are many other types of evidence than those found in science. The atheist scientists here shouldn't believe in Abraham Lincoln being President or WW2 happening because no one has observable evidence of these things.

All of those photos of Abe, and the weeks if not months worth of video recordings from WWII isn't observable evidence?
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown