Why do most think that Science is Bad?

@signed: the basic idea with fundamentalists is that The Bible is gods word, and therefore any translation will be divinely inspired to be utterly correct. (unless its a tramslation your denomination dislikes, in which case its either a false testament or outright lies)

That's probably the case, but I'd rather have something deeper than "we believe what we want to believe and we only want to believe in stuff that fits our religious view!"...it's better for discussion, since that belief basically shuts off any and all respectable discussions when it comes to science vs. superstition/myths/religion*

.

edited 30th Jun '11 5:47:51 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Read the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy and the Dei Verbum.

edited 30th Jun '11 5:48:36 PM by blueharp

@Signed: you likely wont get one. The entire idea is they literally believe any "true" wording of the bible MUST be 100% accurate because jesus will make it so. As circular as that is.

But...that kinda kills the entire thread, and every and all Science vs. myth/religion/superstition debate in existence...

I atleast wish people on the side of religion atleast try to prove the level of truth of their stories...that way we can finally be rid of religion's influence on politics and law once they can not validate themselves.

---

That said, are there any opposition to science that isn't religious and stupid*

^{stupid as in..."my son got ill after a vaccine shot! Science is evil NEVER GET VACCINATED! I must spread the word!!"}

?

edited 30th Jun '11 5:56:13 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Thats kinda of the problem when it comes to the truly 'devout" nutcases. There isnt a whole lot of room for reasoning with them.

In all seriousness, yes, the whole problem of potential bias from translations is a real issue, one that any serious biblical scholar wrestles with on a daily basis, I'd imagine,. But the anti-science, pro-bible types usually gloss over it with the power of jesus.

edited 30th Jun '11 5:55:47 PM by Midgetsnowman

@Signed: Last Thursday-ism is, IIRC, poking fun at YEC by pointing out that if that's the case, God could have made the universe from scratch last thursday, with everything appearing exactly the way it does now, since there's no way to scientifically prove that the universe didn't spring into being, fully formed, last Thursday on a whim.

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw

Yes, Blue Ninja 0 is correct.

Fight smart, not fair.

While the Amish refusal to accept or even acknowledge scientific advancements is religious in origin, I'm not entirely certain I'd call it "stupid"... At least not until you've died and found out whether or not there is a God.

Besides... The Amish are probably the best example of how a christian should act towards science if said christian doesn't like the idea of it...

edited 1st Jul '11 2:57:03 AM by Swish

I think the Amish use some science but not others. I believe it's of a luddite nature and only discourages technology that makes life easier. I think I've read that their carriages have electric blinkers for instance.

Fight smart, not fair.

The amish dont so much hate science as they simply believe the modern world distracts from the only important thing in their life, which is worship of Jesus. They don't actively hate the sciences so much as simply would rather live simple lives of communing with christ.

besides,. most of them have a policy of allowing their children to own technology and see the modern world for a couple years before they have to choose whether to be amish or leave the community and join the modern world, so ts hardly as much forced lack of technology as it is encouraged lack of technology.

Indeed, the Amish don't believe that science doesn't exist, or doesn't work, they just refrain from using new technology which they feel is distracting and so forth. Even that isn't absolute, there are Amish who will use a phone, they just won't have one in their house.

I think it's important to distinguish between the products of science and the process of science. The products of science are what people most commonly associate with science, technology etc. It is perfectly possible to use the products of science without really thinking about where it came from. I can use a computer just fine without knowing the machine code behind it. Similarly, a chemist can use oil to make plastics just fine without thinking about where the oil come from.

The process of science is a mindset, almost a worldview. The central idea is that ideas/beliefs/hypotheses can be tested against real world observations and if the observations can conclusively falsify your notion, then you must discard that notion no matter how much you cherish it. This can be a problem for certain religious people because to those people, their religious views/holy books/etc. are not open to testing and falsification and are assumed to be true a priori. There is where I think the central conflict comes from.

edited 1st Jul '11 9:24:56 AM by nightwyrm_zero

@Blueharp: that too. The Amish arent gonna blush at all about calling the police if some nutter with a gun shows up, or someone desperately needs modern medical care to not die in the immediate sense.