Amazon.com Widgets

Do most answers to science depend on religion?

Asked by: mussa
  • God too, though.

    I'm a Muslim and I do think that most questions depend on religion. No, you don't need God to answer what is gravity and what is sun for but God had planned this to happen and He created a person who could name what this thing is all about which is called, "Science". What story lies behind one certain thing needs to be figured out by ourselves. God created the sun and made us think what it is for. We are made to live and think, so God created things for us to investigate about. Sun is not made of Science. It is only defined with Science. Why it relies on religion? Because it involves The Creator. Maybe Isaac Newton doesn't need God to help him explain us about an attractive force but still, thanks to God for creating gravity and let us discover about it. Have faith in both Science and God, or at least, say thanks.

  • I think so

    Jews, Christians and Muslims all believe that god made the world in his own will. As a Muslim I believe that god could have not created the world but he chose to. He wanted to see us on our roads seeing all those happy faces playing, smiling. He also created and everything (well that's what I believe).

  • Religious views support scientific assumptions

    Scientists assume that all of the laws of nature are constant. Religion teaches that God maintains the universe. Religion guides such metaphysical assumptions.

    Religion also helped to reassure early scientists that the world was rationally understandable, as it was made by a rational being. In other cultures where people were pantheists or followed syncretic belief systems, science was not pursued as rigorously as it was in Europe and Asia.

    Science owes an enormous debt to religion.

  • Two Totally Different Subjects

    Have you ever noticed that most scientists, 52% to be exact, are atheist? In being a scientist, being religious is extremely conflicting. There is no proof of God or Jesus Christ being miraculous figures, thus creating an impossible argument for religious people of all Christian subcategories. Being religious creates a double standard in the science industry: you're either scientific, or religious--there is no "both." Most scientists deny religious affiliation and religion altogether, and the same goes vice versa. Religion and science shouldn't be combined, and should be left separated.

  • Religion and Science Stand Alone

    Religion is a creation of man, and curiously so is science. Yet science is a creation of man, a language created by man inspired by studying the world, by studying fact. Like how ancient civilizations were inspired by Sumerian writing. Obvious rational fact proves science right. Science cannot be explained through faith.

  • What an odd question

    Both Religion and Science are the results of human curiosity.
    The need for explanation of the world around us has resulted in the creation of religion to answer our questions.
    'Why does the Sun rise in the east and set in the west'
    This has now developed into a systematic approach to an actual understanding of the world around us resulting in science.

    The answers to science depend on human curiosity. Religion could be seen as an evolutionary stage of our curiosity.

  • Science and religion are two different things.

    I'm a Christian and I'm not trying to offend somebody. But for one you need to have evidence and the other is based on a 'story'. Science is all about facts and evidence. You can't prove that any religious book is right or true. I'm not saying that every religion is a lie. But you do need to separate religion and science.

  • No, of course not.

    The way that science works is where we analyze, observe, and experiment and discover an answer. Nothing in this methodology requires the concept of religion. Sure, there are religious people that are scientists, that cannot be argued. But the thing here is that absolutely none of their religion played any part in their discovery. Isaac Newton was a Christian, he discovered gravity. It was never because of the fact that he was a Christian that played any part in it. Einstein was Jewish, and it's quite inarguable that he made one of the greatest discovery of our modern era. And lastly, Stephen Hawking is an atheist.

    Notice how the faiths of these three people alone are completely different and yet they still managed to make discoveries? I mean, one of them doesn't even have a faith. Furthermore, lets talk further into detail about their discoveries:

    Is god needed to explain gravity? No, not really. Is god needed to explain atoms? No, not really. Is god needed to explain space? Well, no, apparently not to Stephen Hawking. God is not needed for any of these explanations, and nor is religion.

    Meanwhile lets talk about sun. Is the sun god? No, when we actually decided to look into it, it turned out that thanks to science it isn't a literal god. How about the weather, is it controlled by god? No, it's not. Science has explained that weather is a process.

    If science depended on religion, we wouldn't have ever been able to shut these false hoods down. And currently in the U.S.A we have Creationists utilizing this incredibly dishonest and false pseudo - science that completely goes against the scientific method. Instead of making discoveries and confirmation based on evidence and data, they make their confirmation before hand 'GOD IS REAL! HE CREATED EVERYTHING!' and then utilize evidence and data to support their biased conclusion. This is not how science works, and in this modern world this is the only 'scientific' institution I can think of which requires religion.

    And you know, it's basically completely wrong.

    And lets get to todays world and talk about intelligent design. A pseudo - science which pretends to be scientific, ye


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.