The theories of science are not proven, such as how the universe got here and whether or not evolution is true or not. Yet people believe this, blindly. They believe the theories of faith even though they themselves have not tested those theories. That takes faith. Science has a founding father, Darwin, and many modern day priests, such as Bill Maher.
Now don't get me wrong here. I don't believe at all that science in general is a religion. However statements like "Science is the only valid form of information" "Science is the ultimate" statements often proclaimed by atheists and by the scientism ideology is a form of a science religion.
Science =/= religion, yeah, I agree. HOWEVER, I believe that it should be considered a religion legally b/c it would mean that people's scientific beliefs could not be infringed upon under the first amendment of the US constitution, thus (hopefully) promoting scientific edumafaction
Science is becoming increasingly dominant in today's society. The supporters of main-stream religions are reducing, as more people join the atheist team. Science is a way of living and thinking, a 'modern' religion, you could say. People who have strong faiths in religion do need to accept science, without it they could not do a lot of what they do, so they should accept it as a way of living. Basically, everyone should. Religion is individual and personal, so anything could be a religion.. especially this new, modern, thoughtful way of thinking and living.Its simple.
Science is every bit as faith based as religion. Almost all scientific theories are little more than religious dogma with little or no evidence for them. How can you prove that there is such thing as an atom? How can you prove the big bang happened? How can you prove that energy cannot be created or destroyed? These are things that you cannot prove but you accept on pure faith. The fact that it is a religion that fits together very well with most other religions does not make it any less of a religion.
All scientific discoveries bring light to our ignorant perspective. Causality viewed in context with an end goal of promoting a balance between bio diversity and bio density on a global scale writes all one needs for ethical behavior while maintaining the highest volume of individual choice.
Truth as a quality of any fact must be supported by physical evidence or faith in others that this evidence exists, as the sheer magnitude of all data far exceeds the ability for one person to test each truth.
The way that I define a Religion is that it has a God/ Gods, science is based on facts and is what we have discovered to be true , and things like Buddhism are philosophies. We have no proof that their are eternal being/s so they are beliefs; and science is facts. The difference is that Religion was created by our ancestors to fill the gaps left by a lack of scientific knowledge. As science Is not set on ancient beliefs, I think that it is not a Religion.
Science is a group of facts and theories based on evidence, observation, testing, experimenting, calculating and inferring. Religion is faith based and may or may not have evidence to support them. This means a big difference. Some science theories might not be proven yet, but nonetheless they are still based on solid facts and evidence from observation, and therefore requires little to no faith involved.
someone worships atomic theory or means "religion" in a figurative manner. Science is not a belief, nor is it cultural or involving superstition.
Scientists certainly don't blindly believe in science. Quite the contrary, scientists try to prove theories wrong until they can no longer do so.
Also, scientific laws are around independent of people whereas religion depends on followers to stay alive.
Religion is a collection of belief systems, cultural systems, and worldviews that relate to humanity and spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values. On the other hand Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes in the form of testable explanations and predictions in the universe. Although science definitely isn't a religion. Religion could be considered a science
True religion is in harmony with reality.
Religion relies upon faith and Science relies upon empirical examination. Religion is subjective, and science is objective. Science answers the how, religion answers both the how and why although science is gradually replacing religion in explaining how things happen. This is because science is testable and it's results observable.
Science doesn't involve worshipping anything, and there is nothing supernatural about it. Science is a tool, like logic and math, to discover facts about the Universe. And it's hardly "the religion of atheists," since you needn't be one to accept the validity of science (not that all theists do though, hence why we have creationists).
Religion requires an element of the divine. There is no such element to be found in anything of what science is.
What imabench said
Religion requires of faith. It's a set of dogmas to know about, essentially, the unknowable.
Science does not require faith; it's the gathering of information and search for the truths of our universe, which can be proved or disproved.
I cannot see a connection.