Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Facts for evolutionists
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chalnoth" data-source="post: 48444000" data-attributes="member: 159254"><p>Yeah, and why don't you define what is meant by metaphysical specifically, as opposed to natural? What makes it different? What makes it special?</p><p></p><p>I am aware of the history of science, and I see this aspect of it as nothing more than pandering to religious ignorance, giving religion special status where it simply has none.</p><p></p><p>You're also making the mistake of assuming that science has some sort of fixed, immutable method. This is simply not the case: every single aspect of science is open to revision, including the very methods by which science is performed. The only reason to support any method of science is <em>because it works</em>. Tradition is a completely irrelevant point to make.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Many of the non-religious have also bought into this exact same pandering. I can't say I understand it, but the only reason that comes to mind is that these people just don't want to get in an argument about religion. They'd rather [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] foot around that emotional issue in order to deal with easier arguments. It simply strikes me as appeasement.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chalnoth, post: 48444000, member: 159254"] Yeah, and why don't you define what is meant by metaphysical specifically, as opposed to natural? What makes it different? What makes it special? I am aware of the history of science, and I see this aspect of it as nothing more than pandering to religious ignorance, giving religion special status where it simply has none. You're also making the mistake of assuming that science has some sort of fixed, immutable method. This is simply not the case: every single aspect of science is open to revision, including the very methods by which science is performed. The only reason to support any method of science is [i]because it works[/i]. Tradition is a completely irrelevant point to make. Many of the non-religious have also bought into this exact same pandering. I can't say I understand it, but the only reason that comes to mind is that these people just don't want to get in an argument about religion. They'd rather [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] foot around that emotional issue in order to deal with easier arguments. It simply strikes me as appeasement. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Facts for evolutionists
Top
Bottom