When science does not work

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Rufus21
Scholar
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:30 pm

When science does not work

Post #1

Post by Rufus21 »

paarsurrey1 wrote: I follow science where one should follow science and I follow religion/revelation where science does not work.
Can someone give an example of a situation where science doesn't work?

I've heard people say that science cannot handle situations outside the natural world, but there is no indication that religion can either. In fact, neither can offer any evidence that a supernatural realm exists in the first place. So what are some situations where science does not work but religion does?

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 6050
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6925 times
Been thanked: 3244 times

Re: When science does not work

Post #71

Post by brunumb »

[Replying to post 67 by Hawkins]
Science can't tell what you just did yesterday.
However we can get to know what you did if an eye witness wrote about it for us to believe with faith. That's the only way.
That in itself can be problematic. Before we can accept eyewitness testimony we have to establish their identity and verify their accounts with other supporting evidence. We need to check the accuracy of their account. We need to know if the witness can be trusted and if they have any ulterior motives in claiming to be an eyewitness. There is a lot more to it than just accepting that an alleged eyewitness is presenting the truth. When eyewitness accounts are presented second-hand and no more than claims that there were eyewitnesses, then we are justified in dismissing them.
Science is futile about this.
The scientific method is the best way we can sift out lies and bias and get to the truth of the matter.
Religion is just the claimed accounts of testimonies about God's deeds. It can be just as true as how an eye witness writes about your deeds. The only difference is that you are a human and can't do supernatural deeds while God can.
Unsupported claimed accounts have little value. The claim that God can do supernatural deeds belongs in that category. The attributes of God have all been assigned to him by humans based on what they believe a god should be like. God has yet to verifiably demonstrate that any of them are actually true.

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: When science does not work

Post #72

Post by Goat »

paarsurrey1 wrote:
imhereforyou wrote:
Rufus21 wrote:
paarsurrey1 wrote: I follow science where one should follow science and I follow religion/revelation where science does not work.
Can someone give an example of a situation where science doesn't work?

I've heard people say that science cannot handle situations outside the natural world, but there is no indication that religion can either. In fact, neither can offer any evidence that a supernatural realm exists in the first place. So what are some situations where science does not work but religion does?
Best I can tell, science is simply working evidence of what people do. In other words, if it doesn't 'work' it's more likely a flaw in the people perpetuating it - science isn't broken, we are.
Examples...I would guess those would be when experiments are ran and results aren't what's expected and nothing's learned from it.
In other words, if it doesn't 'work' it's more likely a flaw in the people perpetuating it


In other words, it is like religion. Right, please?
Regards
Nope. Not at all. When it comes to the testing of the theories/hypothoses, .. there is a methodology for making sure there is testable and repeatable predictions. What the method says if the results are not repeatable is that there is a flaw in the model. If there are results that are anomalies, then an examination can be made to see WHY there is an anomaly.. to see if the experiment is flaws, or the theory is either flawed or incomplete.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

For_The_Kingdom
Guru
Posts: 1915
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 3:29 pm

Re: When science does not work

Post #73

Post by For_The_Kingdom »

Rufus21 wrote: Can someone give an example of a situation where science doesn't work?
We are talking about physical science, right? Sure, I can. You cannot scientifically test whether or not what Hitler did during WWII was right, or wrong.

There, a situation where science doesn't work.
Rufus21 wrote: I've heard people say that science cannot handle situations outside the natural world, but there is no indication that religion can either. In fact, neither can offer any evidence that a supernatural realm exists in the first place.
The origin of the natural (which is and has been scientifically confirmed) realm can only come from the supernatural realm.
Rufus21 wrote: So what are some situations where science does not work but religion does?
Oh, you want another one? How about science not being able to tell us whether or not Communism is the better economic choice than Capitalism.

Again, a situation where science does not work.

Post Reply