Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.
The claim keeps being made that the discipline of science is biased against theism and the supernatural. This is just plain wrong.Science simply has nothing to say about God and the supernatural. That is not by choice, it is rather a methodological necessity. Science gains knowledge solely by empirical observaton and testing. This means that the only questions science can legitimately ask are those that at least potentially can be answered empirically. This restricts science to the natural universe.Science is godless, but it is not anti-God. Science is material, but it doesn't say the supernatural is impossible. It is simply the case that if you want to study God or the supernatural, you need to go elsewhere. Changing the definition of science isn't going to alter the limitations of the empirical approach.Disagree? Well the James Randi Educational Foundation will give a million dollars to anyone who can scientifically prove a supernatural event. A million dollar donation will be of great aid to the ID movement. Go for it. Science provides natural explanations for things and it does it very well. If one doesn't like natural explanations then they are free to use religion or philosophy. But don't go making the false claim that there is systemic prejudice against theism. That's just an excuse used to hide bad science.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |