Quote:
Originally Posted by DWarrior
The difference is we can sketch out the process of biochemical formation out of a primordial soup, test the likelihood of such events, and estimate the plausibility of that chain of events. We can investigate the consequences of our assumptions to come up with predictions, test their validity, and either reinforce our belief or invalidate it. We can then take the resulting framework to better understand our world.
If we go the spiritual being route, we close off any possibility of intellectual investigation and progress.
So alright, both require "some sort of faith," but one is much more useful than the other. UMN has pretty strong research science programs, you should go sit in on some lectures.
|
One can argue that having some sort of religion can help you better understand the world as well...that person would proabably be a Bhuddist =)
I'm not negating science at ALL. Evolution DOES exsist, but humans used to be sludge? That part requires just as much faith as religion does. We have more chromosomes alike to a starfish and more skeletal similarities to a dolphin rather than some apes. I feel some have pushed the humans came from apes story as hard as others have pushed that we started as Adam and Eve.
I also think spirituality has become this evil buzz word and gets completely ignored. There is value to both sides. Meditation has proven to lower blood pressure when medicine couldn't. People have been miraculously healed. Scientists have become Christians while they were trying to disprove religious theories.
Can't both sides just admit that there is so much unknown? Why is science more useful than spirtuality? I think they can coexsist nicely.