Is treating Science like a Religion a bad thing?

Asked by: Rhett_Butler
  • Science should not be treated as a religion

    I'd like to start off Science is nothing like religion, nothing at all. If you believe in a religion you learn about love, peace ,faith, kindness and all the main factors to make you a better person and let you look at the cup half full. Science is the reason behind how things work, the particles that make up our world and just how we can even survive from day to day basis, this is telling you how you live and religion is telling you how you should live. And guess what I am not even religious and even I can come up with a decent argument.

  • Science is not a religion

    Religion has faith...And faith is the belief of something without any factual evidence of it....So for example, Christianity which is a monotheistic religion has faith in god....Key word "faith" ....Science doesn't have that because it is based on actual evidence, so no science should not be treated as a religion....

  • Too much faith in anything is bad.

    More and more, I'm starting to see people blindly chant out about "science" in the same way Christian Fundamentalists chant about "God." It's getting to the point now where looking at these people differently is hard. On one hand, you have people following a book with unproven theories. On the other hand, you have people following a box with unproven theories. Both sides rely upon the hypothetical for comfort.

    Science that constitutes fact is undeniable. But the idea that someone can say whether or not the Universe is static without evidence, whether or not cold fusion is possible without evidence, and people mindlessly believe them afterward without doing any research themselves? That's not fact, that's superstition. Just like their forefathers.

    I guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree after all.

    The problem I'm starting to see with modern "science" and the massive influx of it's adherents is the fact that much of what is put out today is hypothetical; it is unproven, undocumented, and sometimes, blatantly false. Take the expansion of the universe: people still can't agree with it. Yet, the most popularized opinion is the one that prevails as "fact" to the masses.

    What, I dare say, is the difference between that and religion?

  • No, not particularly:

    The reality is that humans treat everything religiously so there's really no "worse" for subjects. It is not a matter of whether it is or is not the "True Path" so much as it is a question of human nature. The basic elements that are present require humans to invest in something as a grounding station for their behaviors beyond that point and the anchor can be anything whether it's popular like Science or God or unpopular like (basically) quackery, mysticism, obscure deities, etc.

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