My dear friend... I get your point. However science can be divided into two realms. One is where there is solid reasoning and evidence. The second realm is where there is a pointer to a thruth and the same can be proved at a later time. However religion does not fall in any of these catagories..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrick  Dipiyankar,
You did not get the essence of what I am saying. I am saying that science is not a singular system itself. Science contains the conflict already, and if you believe that is not the case, well then you are a believer, because the ultimate evidence is not in your hands. You would then indeed be a believer in a scientific platform of unification; that science and only science will bring the ultimate answers. I repeat; the final answers can be given by science, but they must be of such a nature that at the same time the other deliveries (of philosophical and in some cases of religious nature) can maintain their own positions as well.
I am not talking about god in opposition to science; that's why I found Lloyd's word amusing already to begin with. Don't turn the table on me when I state you to be believers of science as the singular ultimate entity and make me then all of a sudden the believer of the anti-science or whatever.
You need to re-read the discussion and get back to what this discussion is about, Dipiyankar. Your replies are missing the point. |