Science, Religion, and the Surrounding Confusion.

[Shawnee123]

From the cookies:

Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable.
- H. L. Mencken

[BigV]

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. -- Albert Einstein

[Phage0070]

"It's not much fun being around dumb people." -James Watson, co-unraveler of DNA

[regular.joe]

Originally Posted by Phage0070

"It's not much fun being around dumb people." -James Watson, co-unraveler of DNA

I don't see how this quote applies to the current thread.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by regular.joe

I don't see how this quote applies to the current thread.

Now that right there is funny.

[jinx]

Beer is proof that god loves us and wants us to be happy. -Ben Franklin

[BigV]

Science is a differential equation. Religion is a boundary condition. -- Alan Turing

[BigV]

I found this article today; in it is one of my favorite observations about this contentious issue: Science and Religion ask different questions. Science largely attempts to answer How? and Religion largely attempts to answer Why? When those two questions are transposed, there is less certainty.

A couple of interesting excerpts from the article...

“If you see something you don’t understand, you have to ask ‘why?’ or ‘how?’ ” Mr. Campbell often admonished his students at Ridgeview High School.

Whether the state’s board of education would adopt them, however, was unclear. There were heated objections from some religious organizations and local school boards. In a stormy public comment session, Mr. Campbell defended his fellow writers against complaints that they had not included alternative explanations for life’s diversity, like intelligent design.

His attempt at humor came with an edge:

“We also failed to include astrology, alchemy and the concept of the moon being made of green cheese,” he said. “Because those aren’t science, either.”

The evening of the vote, Mr. Campbell learned by e-mail message from an education official that the words “scientific theory of” had been inserted in front of “evolution” to appease opponents on the board. Even so, the standards passed by only a 4-to-3 vote.

Mr. Campbell cringed at the wording, which seemed to suggest evolution was a kind of hunch instead of the only accepted scientific explanation for the great variety of life on Earth. But he turned off his computer without scrolling through all of the frustrated replies from other writers. The standards, he thought, were finally in place.

Now he just had to teach.

“Science explores nature by testing and gathering data,” he said. “It can’t tell you what’s right and wrong. It doesn’t address ethics. But it is not anti-religion. Science and religion just ask different questions.”

He grabbed the ball and held it still.

“Can anybody think of a question science can’t answer?”

“Is there a God?” shot back a boy near the window.

“Good,” said Mr. Campbell, an Anglican who attends church most Sundays. “Can’t test it. Can’t prove it, can’t disprove it. It’s not a question for science.”