Is science a religion?

[Jmild1]

In a way, yes, science is a religion because it makes people believe in things they have no means to check if they are true. On the other hand science doesn't encourage you to kill those who don't believe in science and that's a good thing. )

Not all religions encourage their people to kill others. In fact, the vast majority of religions encourage the opposite. Atheists generally are not bad people, just like people of other religions.

When science that is not known to be fact is promoted AS fact, and when it has a lot of writing pertaining to it, then the science theory starts to become religion, and the writing about it becomes the dogma.

For example, Big Bang Theory is theory simply because it is not known to be fact. Hydrolysis is science fact because it is understood and used all over the place. But nobody will ever be able to determine if Big Bang Theory ever really happened, because there are (supposedly) 13 billion years separating us from BB times, and nobody can tell how many other events might have happened in all that time to make us FEEL like there was a Big Bang.

The things of many religions are unknown to be factual. Yet many of these things are treated as factual by religious people. Religious dogma has to do with writings about religious things that are not know to be factual.

Big Bang Theory is unknown to be factual. Big Bang theory is treated as factual all over the place. Big Bang writings must be Big Bang dogma. Big Bang is religion. Science theory that is believed to be truth is religion.

But there is a big difference, Big bang theory is based thru method which backed up with supporting details and other things that doesn't contradict nature and what we currently have law of physics, and if something can be debunk it is thrown in the trash bin and updated with a new one that is more reasonable.
while
religion is based in faith which somehow teach contradictions and things that doesn't support any law and doesn't go in study which makes the information static and unchangeable because anything you see in that book is considered as true and can't be change.

[1714579586]

1714579586

[1714579586]

1714579586

[1714579586]

1714579586

[1714579586]

1714579586

[Wilikon]

In a way, yes, science is a religion because it makes people believe in things they have no means to check if they are true. On the other hand science doesn't encourage you to kill those who don't believe in science and that's a good thing. )

Not all religions encourage their people to kill others. In fact, the vast majority of religions encourage the opposite. Atheists generally are not bad people, just like people of other religions.

When science that is not known to be fact is promoted AS fact, and when it has a lot of writing pertaining to it, then the science theory starts to become religion, and the writing about it becomes the dogma.

For example, Big Bang Theory is theory simply because it is not known to be fact. Hydrolysis is science fact because it is understood and used all over the place. But nobody will ever be able to determine if Big Bang Theory ever really happened, because there are (supposedly) 13 billion years separating us from BB times, and nobody can tell how many other events might have happened in all that time to make us FEEL like there was a Big Bang.

The things of many religions are unknown to be factual. Yet many of these things are treated as factual by religious people. Religious dogma has to do with writings about religious things that are not know to be factual.

Big Bang Theory is unknown to be factual. Big Bang theory is treated as factual all over the place. Big Bang writings must be Big Bang dogma. Big Bang is religion. Science theory that is believed to be truth is religion.

But there is a big difference, Big bang theory is based thru method which backed up with supporting details and other things that doesn't contradict nature and what we currently have law of physics, and if something can be debunk it is thrown in the trash bin and updated with a new one that is more reasonable.
while
religion is based in faith which somehow teach contradictions and things that doesn't support any law and doesn't go in study which makes the information static and unchangeable because anything you see in that book is considered as true and can't be change.

Then is this science, or a religion?

[BADecker]

In a way, yes, science is a religion because it makes people believe in things they have no means to check if they are true. On the other hand science doesn't encourage you to kill those who don't believe in science and that's a good thing. )

Not all religions encourage their people to kill others. In fact, the vast majority of religions encourage the opposite. Atheists generally are not bad people, just like people of other religions.

When science that is not known to be fact is promoted AS fact, and when it has a lot of writing pertaining to it, then the science theory starts to become religion, and the writing about it becomes the dogma.

For example, Big Bang Theory is theory simply because it is not known to be fact. Hydrolysis is science fact because it is understood and used all over the place. But nobody will ever be able to determine if Big Bang Theory ever really happened, because there are (supposedly) 13 billion years separating us from BB times, and nobody can tell how many other events might have happened in all that time to make us FEEL like there was a Big Bang.

The things of many religions are unknown to be factual. Yet many of these things are treated as factual by religious people. Religious dogma has to do with writings about religious things that are not know to be factual.

Big Bang Theory is unknown to be factual. Big Bang theory is treated as factual all over the place. Big Bang writings must be Big Bang dogma. Big Bang is religion. Science theory that is believed to be truth is religion.

But there is a big difference, Big bang theory is based thru method which backed up with supporting details and other things that doesn't contradict nature and what we currently have law of physics, and if something can be debunk it is thrown in the trash bin and updated with a new one that is more reasonable.
while
religion is based in faith which somehow teach contradictions and things that doesn't support any law and doesn't go in study which makes the information static and unchangeable because anything you see in that book is considered as true and can't be change.

Then is this science, or a religion?

Neither and both. A better term might be "corruption," but maybe it is only imparting knowledge, depending on what they are teaching about it, and the way that they are teaching it.

[Jmild1]

In a way, yes, science is a religion because it makes people believe in things they have no means to check if they are true. On the other hand science doesn't encourage you to kill those who don't believe in science and that's a good thing. )

Not all religions encourage their people to kill others. In fact, the vast majority of religions encourage the opposite. Atheists generally are not bad people, just like people of other religions.

When science that is not known to be fact is promoted AS fact, and when it has a lot of writing pertaining to it, then the science theory starts to become religion, and the writing about it becomes the dogma.

For example, Big Bang Theory is theory simply because it is not known to be fact. Hydrolysis is science fact because it is understood and used all over the place. But nobody will ever be able to determine if Big Bang Theory ever really happened, because there are (supposedly) 13 billion years separating us from BB times, and nobody can tell how many other events might have happened in all that time to make us FEEL like there was a Big Bang.

The things of many religions are unknown to be factual. Yet many of these things are treated as factual by religious people. Religious dogma has to do with writings about religious things that are not know to be factual.

Big Bang Theory is unknown to be factual. Big Bang theory is treated as factual all over the place. Big Bang writings must be Big Bang dogma. Big Bang is religion. Science theory that is believed to be truth is religion.

But there is a big difference, Big bang theory is based thru method which backed up with supporting details and other things that doesn't contradict nature and what we currently have law of physics, and if something can be debunk it is thrown in the trash bin and updated with a new one that is more reasonable.
while
religion is based in faith which somehow teach contradictions and things that doesn't support any law and doesn't go in study which makes the information static and unchangeable because anything you see in that book is considered as true and can't be change.

Then is this science, or a religion?

Implementation of something that has a science concept is quite odd for science being a religion.

First the concept(gender) is already studied and prove that homosexuality exist in our world.
Secondly, the articles doesn't talk about any science rather than an implementation of proved fact.

So your link has nothing to do with science being a religion.

Just my opinion about the article, I think the idea of this is not quite good, they should just give them a book with an info about homosexuality just to make them aware rather than implementing a program, and for a young child. It is quite hazardous to do so and will make young children in a trauma(cause they forcing the child to do the program), they should've implemented this in higher school

[Wilikon]

In a way, yes, science is a religion because it makes people believe in things they have no means to check if they are true. On the other hand science doesn't encourage you to kill those who don't believe in science and that's a good thing. )

Not all religions encourage their people to kill others. In fact, the vast majority of religions encourage the opposite. Atheists generally are not bad people, just like people of other religions.

When science that is not known to be fact is promoted AS fact, and when it has a lot of writing pertaining to it, then the science theory starts to become religion, and the writing about it becomes the dogma.

For example, Big Bang Theory is theory simply because it is not known to be fact. Hydrolysis is science fact because it is understood and used all over the place. But nobody will ever be able to determine if Big Bang Theory ever really happened, because there are (supposedly) 13 billion years separating us from BB times, and nobody can tell how many other events might have happened in all that time to make us FEEL like there was a Big Bang.

The things of many religions are unknown to be factual. Yet many of these things are treated as factual by religious people. Religious dogma has to do with writings about religious things that are not know to be factual.

Big Bang Theory is unknown to be factual. Big Bang theory is treated as factual all over the place. Big Bang writings must be Big Bang dogma. Big Bang is religion. Science theory that is believed to be truth is religion.

But there is a big difference, Big bang theory is based thru method which backed up with supporting details and other things that doesn't contradict nature and what we currently have law of physics, and if something can be debunk it is thrown in the trash bin and updated with a new one that is more reasonable.
while
religion is based in faith which somehow teach contradictions and things that doesn't support any law and doesn't go in study which makes the information static and unchangeable because anything you see in that book is considered as true and can't be change.

Then is this science, or a religion?

Implementation of something that has a science concept is quite odd for science being a religion.

First the concept(gender) is already studied and prove that homosexuality exist in our world.
Secondly, the articles doesn't talk about any science rather than an implementation of proved fact.

So your link has nothing to do with science being a religion.

Just my opinion about the article, I think the idea of this is not quite good, they should just give them a book with an info about homosexuality just to make them aware rather than implementing a program, and for a young child. It is quite hazardous to do so and will make young children in a trauma(cause they forcing the child to do the program), they should've implemented this in higher school

Hmm... Of course homosexuality exist in our world. It is mentioned in the Bible and the Quran.

When people say trans is not a mental illness do you agree it is based on a belief, or science?

You don't have to answer that of course. It does not matter what you believe. It does not matter what I believe. You have to know this is now based on irrefutable and settled scientific proof it is not.

That is why it is part of the school program, just like the study of the male and female skeleton in biology...

[Jmild1]

In a way, yes, science is a religion because it makes people believe in things they have no means to check if they are true. On the other hand science doesn't encourage you to kill those who don't believe in science and that's a good thing. )

Not all religions encourage their people to kill others. In fact, the vast majority of religions encourage the opposite. Atheists generally are not bad people, just like people of other religions.

When science that is not known to be fact is promoted AS fact, and when it has a lot of writing pertaining to it, then the science theory starts to become religion, and the writing about it becomes the dogma.

For example, Big Bang Theory is theory simply because it is not known to be fact. Hydrolysis is science fact because it is understood and used all over the place. But nobody will ever be able to determine if Big Bang Theory ever really happened, because there are (supposedly) 13 billion years separating us from BB times, and nobody can tell how many other events might have happened in all that time to make us FEEL like there was a Big Bang.

The things of many religions are unknown to be factual. Yet many of these things are treated as factual by religious people. Religious dogma has to do with writings about religious things that are not know to be factual.

Big Bang Theory is unknown to be factual. Big Bang theory is treated as factual all over the place. Big Bang writings must be Big Bang dogma. Big Bang is religion. Science theory that is believed to be truth is religion.

But there is a big difference, Big bang theory is based thru method which backed up with supporting details and other things that doesn't contradict nature and what we currently have law of physics, and if something can be debunk it is thrown in the trash bin and updated with a new one that is more reasonable.
while
religion is based in faith which somehow teach contradictions and things that doesn't support any law and doesn't go in study which makes the information static and unchangeable because anything you see in that book is considered as true and can't be change.

Then is this science, or a religion?

Implementation of something that has a science concept is quite odd for science being a religion.

First the concept(gender) is already studied and prove that homosexuality exist in our world.
Secondly, the articles doesn't talk about any science rather than an implementation of proved fact.

So your link has nothing to do with science being a religion.

Just my opinion about the article, I think the idea of this is not quite good, they should just give them a book with an info about homosexuality just to make them aware rather than implementing a program, and for a young child. It is quite hazardous to do so and will make young children in a trauma(cause they forcing the child to do the program), they should've implemented this in higher school

Hmm... Of course homosexuality exist in our world. It is mentioned in the Bible and the Quran.

When people say trans is not a mental illness do you agree it is based on a belief, or science?

You don't have to answer that of course. It does not matter what you believe. It does not matter what I believe. You have to know this is now based on irrefutable and settled scientific proof it is not.

That is why it is part of the school program, just like the study of the male and female skeleton in biology...

Mental Illness? Do you think the genes of a child make him Ill? I believe the gene is related on the way child act but that doesn't make him ill

[Wilikon]

In a way, yes, science is a religion because it makes people believe in things they have no means to check if they are true. On the other hand science doesn't encourage you to kill those who don't believe in science and that's a good thing. )

Not all religions encourage their people to kill others. In fact, the vast majority of religions encourage the opposite. Atheists generally are not bad people, just like people of other religions.

When science that is not known to be fact is promoted AS fact, and when it has a lot of writing pertaining to it, then the science theory starts to become religion, and the writing about it becomes the dogma.

For example, Big Bang Theory is theory simply because it is not known to be fact. Hydrolysis is science fact because it is understood and used all over the place. But nobody will ever be able to determine if Big Bang Theory ever really happened, because there are (supposedly) 13 billion years separating us from BB times, and nobody can tell how many other events might have happened in all that time to make us FEEL like there was a Big Bang.

The things of many religions are unknown to be factual. Yet many of these things are treated as factual by religious people. Religious dogma has to do with writings about religious things that are not know to be factual.

Big Bang Theory is unknown to be factual. Big Bang theory is treated as factual all over the place. Big Bang writings must be Big Bang dogma. Big Bang is religion. Science theory that is believed to be truth is religion.

But there is a big difference, Big bang theory is based thru method which backed up with supporting details and other things that doesn't contradict nature and what we currently have law of physics, and if something can be debunk it is thrown in the trash bin and updated with a new one that is more reasonable.
while
religion is based in faith which somehow teach contradictions and things that doesn't support any law and doesn't go in study which makes the information static and unchangeable because anything you see in that book is considered as true and can't be change.

Then is this science, or a religion?

Implementation of something that has a science concept is quite odd for science being a religion.

First the concept(gender) is already studied and prove that homosexuality exist in our world.
Secondly, the articles doesn't talk about any science rather than an implementation of proved fact.

So your link has nothing to do with science being a religion.

Just my opinion about the article, I think the idea of this is not quite good, they should just give them a book with an info about homosexuality just to make them aware rather than implementing a program, and for a young child. It is quite hazardous to do so and will make young children in a trauma(cause they forcing the child to do the program), they should've implemented this in higher school

Hmm... Of course homosexuality exist in our world. It is mentioned in the Bible and the Quran.

When people say trans is not a mental illness do you agree it is based on a belief, or science?

You don't have to answer that of course. It does not matter what you believe. It does not matter what I believe. You have to know this is now based on irrefutable and settled scientific proof it is not.

That is why it is part of the school program, just like the study of the male and female skeleton in biology...

Mental Illness? Do you think the genes of a child make him Ill? I believe the gene is related on the way child act but that doesn't make him ill

It was a scientific fact it was classified as a mental illness, until it was not anymore  by the same scientists...

Do you mean the trans genes found by biology?

[BADecker]

In a way, yes, science is a religion because it makes people believe in things they have no means to check if they are true. On the other hand science doesn't encourage you to kill those who don't believe in science and that's a good thing. )

Not all religions encourage their people to kill others. In fact, the vast majority of religions encourage the opposite. Atheists generally are not bad people, just like people of other religions.

When science that is not known to be fact is promoted AS fact, and when it has a lot of writing pertaining to it, then the science theory starts to become religion, and the writing about it becomes the dogma.

For example, Big Bang Theory is theory simply because it is not known to be fact. Hydrolysis is science fact because it is understood and used all over the place. But nobody will ever be able to determine if Big Bang Theory ever really happened, because there are (supposedly) 13 billion years separating us from BB times, and nobody can tell how many other events might have happened in all that time to make us FEEL like there was a Big Bang.

The things of many religions are unknown to be factual. Yet many of these things are treated as factual by religious people. Religious dogma has to do with writings about religious things that are not know to be factual.

Big Bang Theory is unknown to be factual. Big Bang theory is treated as factual all over the place. Big Bang writings must be Big Bang dogma. Big Bang is religion. Science theory that is believed to be truth is religion.

But there is a big difference, Big bang theory is based thru method which backed up with supporting details and other things that doesn't contradict nature and what we currently have law of physics, and if something can be debunk it is thrown in the trash bin and updated with a new one that is more reasonable.
while
religion is based in faith which somehow teach contradictions and things that doesn't support any law and doesn't go in study which makes the information static and unchangeable because anything you see in that book is considered as true and can't be change.

Then is this science, or a religion?

Implementation of something that has a science concept is quite odd for science being a religion.

First the concept(gender) is already studied and prove that homosexuality exist in our world.
Secondly, the articles doesn't talk about any science rather than an implementation of proved fact.

So your link has nothing to do with science being a religion.

Just my opinion about the article, I think the idea of this is not quite good, they should just give them a book with an info about homosexuality just to make them aware rather than implementing a program, and for a young child. It is quite hazardous to do so and will make young children in a trauma(cause they forcing the child to do the program), they should've implemented this in higher school

Hmm... Of course homosexuality exist in our world. It is mentioned in the Bible and the Quran.

When people say trans is not a mental illness do you agree it is based on a belief, or science?

You don't have to answer that of course. It does not matter what you believe. It does not matter what I believe. You have to know this is now based on irrefutable and settled scientific proof it is not.

That is why it is part of the school program, just like the study of the male and female skeleton in biology...

Mental Illness? Do you think the genes of a child make him Ill? I believe the gene is related on the way child act but that doesn't make him ill

For genetics to make homosexuality in people, the whole form of their lives would have to drastically change. If it didn't, the person would not live.

The so-called homosexual genetic tendencies that seem to exist in some ways, are really part of the makeup of a person that allows him/her to be different. The fact that he/she uses those apparent tendencies to live a homosexual lifestyle, is something done by choice, not because his genetics forced him into it.

[Blackmet]

Science is not a religion, beleving on different scietfiic stuff is lame, i am sure that many scientits are atheists and it's mean that they don't support any religion.

[Wilikon]

Science is not a religion, beleving on different scietfiic stuff is lame, i am sure that many scientits are atheists and it's mean that they don't support any religion.

Many scientists also are not atheists. Are they lame, or not real scientists?

[Superbitzz]

no i dont think ta tscience is a religion. i think science is free from all kind of religion. but may be a part of every religion. so every religion give an option to investigate the world and discover it.

[Cresciuanto]

my personal view is that science is not a religion, but all religions are science at all. if we speak about Islam. Being Muslim I have a little knowledge about Islam. for example in Islam Allah says that discover the world as it is for your benefits. so every thing that science is discovering today are present there in Holly Quran. you can really find the answer of any problem in Holly Quran.

[BADecker]

From the viewpoint of many people who don't know about the proof that God exists, believing in God is religion, because they don't know for a fact that He exists or doesn't exist.

In a similar way, science is religion for anyone who adamantly believes science theory to be fact. Science theory is not known to be fact. It might be or might not be.

[ausbit]

my personal view is that science is not a religion, but all religions are science at all. if we speak about Islam. Being Muslim I have a little knowledge about Islam. for example in Islam Allah says that discover the world as it is for your benefits. so every thing that science is discovering today are present there in Holly Quran. you can really find the answer of any problem in Holly Quran.

Really?  Point me to the chapter that explains cancer and its cures.  Celiac disease, no?  How about HIV?  Hearing loss?

Gravitational waves?  Theory of relativity, Maxwell equations? No?  How about electricity?  Heart pacemaker?  Personal computers?
HTML coding styles?  Internet protocols: SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, FTP?  How about bitcoin?  Show us where in Quran, Allah is explaining bitcoin!!!

Maybe DNA sequences of animals that Allah created? Black holes? Supernovas?  Black matter?

Please be specific.  Just list the chapters that cover the above topics.

Oh come on. We, humans are very anxious. Qurans may have some the scientific terms of that time, that maybe irrelevant at the time, however the inception of research had begun a long time ago, form which quran, tripitaka, bibal, vedas, and many other had written.

[kryptqnick]

Science is not a religion, in any way. Science is based on facts and researches and religion is based on beleiving without asking questions.

However, both science and religion based on some hypothesis that disproved with time by more strong hypothesis. By more strong hypothesis I mean the one which more strictly connected to the facts. But they both based on believing that facts they represented are the truth. By this way, religion is protoscience and science is criticism of the religion. Although both they have something common and they are not opposites, but science genetically succeeds religion as more accurate approach to reality. See "The Logic of Scientific Discovery" by Karl Popper, my friend.

[Jmild1]

Well IMO science is not a religion. Religion is a hypothesis that don't need proof for believing. Science though is hypothesis but it investigate first using scientific method.

Agree, religon is based thru faith which means believing without concrete evidence, you just need to believe that's all. Why science is based thru hypothesis where you gather data and being scrutinized before it will be accept as fact.

[StingrayX]

When i think aboabout the facts and not terms, i would think : why this separation between Religion & Science ?

NORMALLY, both exist for the good of Humanity... So, a brave religious follower shouldn't have a contradictory point of view with good aiming Sciences... Also, a brave Scientist can easily be in harmony with the religious values as they present a moral support for him to continue in his way.

BUT, Humans want to find excuses to avoid the obligations of fellowing the right way when it forbids them from getting a "dirty" benefit.
SO, when benefits become more important than values, both Religion & Science become just a "dirty" tool to control ignorant people who don't have enough knowledge to make a proofed decision OR those people who will share benefits.

AND SO, what's the difference between these two words and between any other word if their output is related to the Human's use or abuse 

[bitcoinboy12]

my personal view is that science is not a religion, but all religions are science at all. if we speak about Islam. Being Muslim I have a little knowledge about Islam. for example in Islam Allah says that discover the world as it is for your benefits. so every thing that science is discovering today are present there in Holly Quran. you can really find the answer of any problem in Holly Quran.

Really?  Point me to the chapter that explains cancer and its cures.  Celiac disease, no?  How about HIV?  Hearing loss?

Gravitational waves?  Theory of relativity, Maxwell equations? No?  How about electricity?  Heart pacemaker?  Personal computers?
HTML coding styles?  Internet protocols: SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, FTP?  How about bitcoin?  Show us where in Quran, Allah is explaining bitcoin!!!

Maybe DNA sequences of animals that Allah created? Black holes? Supernovas?  Black matter?

Please be specific.  Just list the chapters that cover the above topics.

Oh come on. We, humans are very anxious. Qurans may have some the scientific terms of that time, that maybe irrelevant at the time, however the inception of research had begun a long time ago, form which quran, tripitaka, bibal, vedas, and many other had written.

So don't give these blanket statements that Quran has all (or even some) the scientific answers.  Quran was written by Allah (aka Muhammad scribes), they were 6th century warmongers, pirates of the land routes, ruthless killers and pedophiles.  Nothing more, nothing less.

Don't feel bad though, Christian God was a 1st century carpenter and 1500-2500 BC goat herders.  So expect the same type of wisdom from the Bible as you have in Quran.  Jewish God goes back even further, so expect even less civilized wisdom.

Arab world was a center of the scientific world before ISLAM took over.  It cannot recover since then.

Science will advance our world without your Gods.  Whether you like it or not. 

God is irrelevant to science.  Well, maybe psychiatric researchers might be interested in study religious delusions, but for the rest of science, God is not even a question.

If you ask me. I think those claims on DaVinci code has a point somehow. How science and religion compliment each other not exactly contradict each other.

[ardentvolcanoes]

no it is not a religion . it is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. and religion is the belief in and worship of a God or gods.

[BADecker]

no it is not a religion . it is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. and religion is the belief in and worship of a God or gods.

But after that is science theory, which is not known to be fact just like many people don't know if God is fact or not. When people believe science theory to be fact, they are making science a religion for themselves. Since this includes many of the major scientists, science has become a religion.