Religion vs. Science

**Souleater** · 15 Nov. 2009 05:47am

This little debate is still one that can bring about as many fist fights now as it could a few years ago.

I want to know what people think is more realistic, religion or science. DO you believe in the religious side of things where one god made anything and everything in existance, and is the eternal being in the universe that is and knows all, or are you more inclined to look at science and believe that there is an ever growing and fielding expanse of space outside of this plane and that we came into being after billions of years of molecular anomalies that eventually resulted in the creation of multicellular organisms that eventually evolved into what we are today?

Or are you a neutral party, and have no belief or feelings either way?

Begin your debates.

(My point of view will remain neutral).

15 Nov. 2009 06:00am

Science, obviously. I'm not sure why you posed the "which view is more realistic," since religion in and of itself relies on the "supernatural" or beyond physics, logic, nature, and objective evidence. Science on the other hand relies solely on objective evidence, so anyone who can deny it is nothing short of willfully ignorant.
So, obviously I say science.

**lazypando** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:03am

Originally Posted by GAMEchief

Science, obviously. I'm not sure why you posed the "which view is more realistic," since religion in and of itself relies on the "supernatural" or beyond physics, logic, nature, and objective evidence. Science on the other hand relies solely on objective evidence, so anyone who can deny it is nothing short of willfully ignorant.
So, obviously I say science.

personally, i side with you

however...there are people who believe that science is a part of a supernatural world...that some higher being gave us the power of reason and logic

**Souleater** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:06am

Originally Posted by GAMEchief

Science, obviously. I'm not sure why you posed the "which view is more realistic," since religion in and of itself relies on the "supernatural" or beyond physics, logic, nature, and objective evidence. Science on the other hand relies solely on objective evidence, so anyone who can deny it is nothing short of willfully ignorant.
So, obviously I say science.

Science does hold the most logical answers behind it, but on the other hand, there are studies where prayer and religion help people recover faster from illness and being injured, and it even helps most people beat addictions.

Its easy to see where the science is better then the thought of religion, but the powers of religion can't be underestimated as much as they seem to be. And since there is evidence to support the scientific view, its more widely accepted, which is fine, but it also comes down to what belief system you follow, for one thing I don't really follow religion, but I'm not centered into the thought of science being the ultimate answer even though it is the most logical answer as science can't answer everything.

Thank you for your input, it will hopefully keep the debate going.

15 Nov. 2009 06:07am

Which is pretty contradicting that a being would give us logic which we would in turn use to deduce that that being is illogical. I find it funny how if there were no god, everything would be exactly the same as it is now.

Originally Posted by ~Souleater~

Science does hold the most logical answers behind it, but on the other hand, there are studies where prayer and religion help people recover faster from illness and being injured, and it even helps most people beat addictions.

Prayer beats addiction, but that's psychological. Every study (or, I should say, the vast, vast majority; because as statistics will show us, there are always outliers) has shown that prayer does not improve recovery rates, or anything outside of psychology. Religion has never objectively altered the physical world. Merely the mental one, which can be explained through psychology - yet another science that requires no God to exist for it t

rk.

**lazypando** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:12am

Originally Posted by GAMEchief

Which is pretty contradicting that a being would give us logic which we would in turn use to deduce that that being is illogical. I find it funny how if there were no god, everything would be exactly the same as it is now.

Prayer beats addiction, but that's psychological. Every study (or, I should say, the vast, vast majority; because as statistics will show us, there are always outliers) has shown that prayer does not improve recovery rates, or anything outside of psychology. Religion has never objectively altered the physical world. Merely the mental one, which can be explained through psychology - yet another science that requires no God to exist for it t

rk.

i actually don't know the other side very well but i can try XD

soo...from what i've discovered...
only people who are atheist to begin with believe in solely logic
most other people believe in a combination of the two (which means that it is actually no contradicting)

**Souleater** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:16am

Originally Posted by GAMEchief

Which is pretty contradicting that a being would give us logic which we would in turn use to deduce that that being is illogical. I find it funny how if there were no god, everything would be exactly the same as it is now.

Prayer beats addiction, but that's psychological. Every study (or, I should say, the vast, vast majority; because as statistics will show us, there are always outliers) has shown that prayer does not improve recovery rates, or anything outside of psychology. Religion has never objectively altered the physical world. Merely the mental one, which can be explained through psychology - yet another science that requires no God to exist for it t

rk.

and yet the mental state is influenced by their beliefs. There are things that can't be explained just on the basis that it requires a leap of faith to begin with. prayer alters the mental state, which is shown through science, but its still there that it is prayer that is making the person believe it is getting better, and makes it do so. The mind is the most powerful unit on this planet and the fact is, if the mind believes that prayer and a so-called god will make them feel better then it is their prayer and the courses of science that make it possible.

As i said its all a leap of faith. Even the belief in science requires a leap of faith as not everything in science is 100%, as is the same with religion, nothing is ever 100%. It all comes down to what you want to believe holds a better answer for you and if that answer is the right one for you. It all comes down to personal beliefs, and lets face it science requires you to have just as many, if not more strongly held personal beliefs as religion does.

Both are sides of a double edged sword.

15 Nov. 2009 06:17am

Originally Posted by lazypando

i actually don't know the other side very well but i can try XD

soo...from what i've discovered...
only people who are atheist to begin with believe in solely logic
most other people believe in a combination of the two (which means that it is actually no contradicting)

I know religious people believe in the supernatural, and supernatural things are illogical. Which is why it's silly to think that something illogical gave us logic, even though illogical things are possible (and exist), which pretty much defeats the purpose of having logic in the first place.

and yet the mental state is influenced by their beliefs. There are things that can't be explained just on the basis that it requires a leap of faith to begin with. prayer alters the mental state, which is shown through science, but its still there that it is prayer that is making the person believe it is getting better, and makes it do so. The mind is the most powerful unit on this planet and the fact is, if the mind believes that prayer and a so-called god will make them feel better then it is their prayer and the courses of science that make it possible.

As i said its all a leap of faith. Even the belief in science requires a leap of faith as not everything in science is 100%, as is the same with religion, nothing is ever 100%. It all comes down to what you want to believe holds a better answer for you and if that answer is the right one for you. It all comes down to personal beliefs, and lets face it science requires you to have just as many, if not more strongly held personal beliefs as religion does.

Believing that your physical state has changed and your physical state actually changing are two objectively different things. You may not feel like your arm is broken, but it can be proven that it is. And prayer is not going to help that arm heal any faster, and that's been proven. As I said, "feeling better" is a mental thing, which can be influenced by religion, as the scientific study of psychology can show. Does that mean the religion is right? Hardly, as it works regardless of what religion you believe or what god you pray to. Yes, religion is powerful, but that does not make it objective. The psychology behind religion is objective, in its ability to alter mental states, but that psychology is separate from the religion itself, as it works with all religions and beliefs, including lack of belief. Physical states on the other hand, actually "being better," have objectively been proven that they can't be altered by religion.

**lazypando** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:18am

Originally Posted by GAMEchief

I know religious people believe in the supernatural, which is illogical. Which is why it's silly to think that something illogical gave us logic, even though illogical things are possible (and exist), which pretty much defeats the purpose of having logic in the first place.

and why is the supernatural illogical?
there are lots of things in science that are also pretty "illogical"

**Artificial** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:26am

What I believe is somewhere in between. Don't get me wrong, I believe in the science of this universe, however I also believe there could quite plausibly be something more beyond these laws that led to its creation. However, that's not to say I buy in to religion on earth. They're all crap, and all incredibly flawed.

15 Nov. 2009 06:27am

Nothing in science is illogical. If it were, it wouldn't be science. Supernatural practically means illogical, because it means outside of our understanding and ability to explain. If you cannot explain something, that means there is no logic behind it. Often, it may mean that logical process has not been discovered yet, but most supernatural beliefs include that it will never and can never be explained.

**lazypando** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:32am

Originally Posted by GAMEchief

Nothing in science is illogical. If it were, it wouldn't be science. Supernatural practically means illogical, because it means outside of our understanding and ability to explain. If you cannot explain something, that means there is no logic behind it. Often, it may mean that logical process has not been discovered yet, but most supernatural beliefs include that it will never and can never be explained.

physics....works most of the time (except when you deal w/ super small stuff or super large stuff)

chemistry/quantum mechanics....so much guess work goes into it

science is still very limited in it's knowledge at this point

**Snow-kun** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:34am

Science. It shows more proof than Religion

**Artificial** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:34am

Originally Posted by GAMEchief

Nothing in science is illogical. If it were, it wouldn't be science. Supernatural practically means illogical, because it means outside of our understanding and ability to explain. If you cannot explain something, that means there is no logic behind it. Often, it may mean that logical process has not been discovered yet, but most supernatural beliefs include that it will never and can never be explained.

Point is though science is always evolving. What was considered illogical two thousand years ago may now be known as fact. Just because something seems incomprehensible today doesn't mean it will 500 years from now.

Baruch Spinoza - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I am an avid follower of this man's philosophy.

15 Nov. 2009 06:57am

Originally Posted by Artificial

Point is though science is always evolving. What was considered illogical two thousand years ago may now be known as fact. Just because something seems incomprehensible today doesn't mean it will 500 years from now.

Baruch Spinoza - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I am an avid follower of this man's philosophy.

Which I stated. It often means that it hasn't been discovered yet.

Now, this topic seems to be a little vague. In what sense are we discussing religion? In its ideas of facts, or its ideas of morality? Because science (outside of a select few areas) doesn't tell you how to act, it tells you what is. Is the subject, "If religion tells you one thing, and science tells you another, which do you believe?" (e.g. homosexuality is or isn't a choice) As I can't think of another area where they overlap. Because if that's the case, my first statement stands that science is objective while religion is not, hence its superiority on such matters.

Originally Posted by Artificial

Baruch Spinoza - I am an avid follower of this man's philosophy.

Nice. Semi-related is my epiphenomenalistic belief. I didn't read the full content of the link you provided, but the summarized quote ("Substance, its attributes, and modes") reminded me of my belief, and according to the Wiki for epiphenomenalism, Spinoza had his own form of epiphenomenalistic belief.

**Simon Fiction™** · 15 Nov. 2009 04:10pm

Science, but i can understand why some people find happiness within religion.
Religion must be nice to actually believe in, being able to right off everything that happens in your life as being an act of god's will deffinately helps a lot of people.

I myself am an avid believer in knowledge, i like to know both theories to everything. Not just listening to the scientific, but also listening the to religious explanation. However i do choose to believe in the scientific version, as having "faith" is not a practicality.

**Rayne 111** · 15 Nov. 2009 06:59pm

Im in the middle I suppose. However Im falling more to the Science side of things. Religion was probably invented Thousands of years ago to keep people in line and keep the fear factor going. "Do this, or your going to Hell". However im not disagreing that Universe was created by God. But as our technology grows we seem to be finding out more facts to support the Scientific side of this Argument.

**Jesus! Muffin** · 15 Nov. 2009 07:20pm

As an agnostic 13 year old, i dont know as much about the physics and shit, but i do know that there is no way i will ever believe in religion. It makes really, no sense. The more i think about it, the more likely it seems to be a more natural creation. Not spiritual. Or however you would say that.

**Simon Fiction™** · 16 Nov. 2009 08:49am

Originally Posted by Jesus! Muffin

As an agnostic 13 year old, i dont know as much about the physics and shit, but i do know that there is no way i will ever believe in religion. It makes really, no sense. The more i think about it, the more likely it seems to be a more natural creation. Not spiritual. Or however you would say that.

That'd make you an athiest (:
but in all fairness science proves how the world was started, through facts such as the big bang can still be heard throughout space, it's just religion has a sort of cult following ^^.

Religion shouldn't be outlawed or anything drastic, i just think it's incredibly nieve to ignore evidence because you have "faith".
Still - the side you choose to believe is generally, but not limited to, how you're braught up. Those braught up in a religious house would very rarely choose to believe the scientific view; which is a waste of some brilliant minds.

**Google** · 16 Nov. 2009 08:55am

I don't believe in god, I believe in science!

A quote from a movie.. but I dunno which one xDD

**Simon Fiction™** · 16 Nov. 2009 08:56am

Originally Posted by Google

I don't believe in god, I believe in science!

A quote from a movie.. but I dunno which one xDD

It's from Nacho Libre.
Which by the way is the worst film ever.
Don't watch it.
Ever.

God i'ma go an hero for knowing that.

16 Nov. 2009 01:53pm

Originally Posted by Simon Fiction™

That'd make you an athiest (:

No, he's an agnostic as he said. He didn't say that a god didn't create the universe, just that none of the BS earthly religions represent that god. That would be deism, and since he's not sure that a deistic god exists (and he isn't denying that a deistic god exist), he's agnostic.

but in all fairness science proves how the world was started, through facts such as the big bang can still be heard throughout space, it's just religion has a sort of cult following ^^.

I'm not sure if it's considered fact until we can reproduce it. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence for sure, and it makes perfect sense without the need of a creator being. I'm not disagreeing that this is how it happened, but I don't think the theory is self-supporting enough (like evolution) to be called fact, even though it makes epic sense.

Still - the side you choose to believe is generally, but not limited to, how you're braught up. Those braught up in a religious house would very rarely choose to believe the scientific view; which is a waste of some brilliant minds.

True. This has been proven. A person gets his religion from his parents >90% of the time. Muslim parents who adopt Christian children will raise Muslim children. Religion isn't genetic, and it isn't divinely granted upon you. It comes from your parents, and it's as simple as that.

**C0FFINCASE** · 16 Nov. 2009 03:38pm

How about both?
Consider this. We are a genetic anomaly. We're not exactly the most adapt to survive without our technology. The way our genes and DNA came to be out off all the possibility is too extreme to ascribe to mere chance. There has to be a guiding force. Most of us have an innate moral code instilled in us naturally, animals don't so there has to be something more to us. Not all religion is correct, very few are even close. Roman Catholicism is closer than most would think, but everyone makes it out to be crazy.
Science is really no different from religion, you do some experiments and publish the results, people believe these results without question for years, until disproved some years later due to advances in technology.

@Gamer: Prayer absolutely can help your arm heal faster. There was a scientific study done with Buddist monks. They prayed for 30 minutes over a dead battery and caused it to recharge it. In another instance scientist have studied monks that offer healing therapies with prayer. These guys can heat rolled up aluminum foil with their minds and use chi points to heal.
There are also documented cases where people have payed and there have been "miracles" where people are healed over night of incurable diseases and injuries.
The real fact in all of this is faith. The human mind is very powerful, if you believe in something it can be made reality. Athletes have died because of intense visualization sessions. The belief in a power ever stronger is a strong motivator.
Religion doesn't come from parents very often. Most reject their parents' beliefs these days.

**Bman** · 16 Nov. 2009 03:45pm

I am with alex on this one, im in between. Yes science causes evolving and shit but, the point of an all mighty being sounds plausible. Imo they are both true

17 Nov. 2009 03:19am

Scince. Because there are may religion in the world. Simple as that [:

**C0FFINCASE** · 17 Nov. 2009 03:37am

Originally Posted by l3ouncy

Scince. Because there are may religion in the world. Simple as that [:

There are divisions in science too. Scientist disagree on all kinds of things, even fundamental things.

17 Nov. 2009 03:38am

Originally Posted by C0FFINCASE

There are divisions in science too. Scientist disagree on all kinds of things, even fundamental things.

Well.. Umm. Shut up D: im trying to act smart

**pringles** · 17 Nov. 2009 03:40am

i beleive in god and hell but i dont beleive in adam and eve it just does not make sense that god showed up so many times back then but he never does now and that eve is a rib how the hell does that work

**NotNeccesary** · 17 Nov. 2009 03:40am

Religion. I'm Christian and I can honestly say that I believe pretty much all in it. The fact that Jesus was able to go through a bunch of torture has lead scientists to experiment and say that he would've died at just the whipping and the thorns would've killed him right there and then. That right there is a flaw but Jesus could do anything for he was the Son of God. See, it all depends on how your mind is set. It's what you really want to believe not facts on stone.

bouncy- you spelled science wrong

**C0FFINCASE** · 17 Nov. 2009 03:44am

Originally Posted by menlohahay

i beleive in god and hell but i dont beleive in adam and eve it just does not make sense that god showed up so many times back then but he never does now and that eve is a rib how the hell does that work

The Christian religions that interpret the Bible literally and believe in Adam and Eve are morons. The Roman Catholic Church doesn't even believe that the Bible is literal. Genesis teaches concepts and morals concepts, nothing more.

17 Nov. 2009 03:44am

Sorry and ima outbid you on that katana D:<

17 Nov. 2009 03:44am

I think that most religions are based on getting people to follow them. You can believe what you want without going to church, but i think church is just a way of trying to convince you that all these things are there. It's just an act.

There is science to prove almost everything that religion says is not. Adam and eve, First man and woman on earth, which would make us all incredibly inbred, and quite possibly one color, what ever that may be. But there is science to prove evolution took place. There is nothing but written text to say adam and eve was ever here.

17 Nov. 2009 03:45am

Originally Posted by C0FFINCASE

We are a genetic anomaly. We're not exactly the most adapt to survive without our technology.

We certainly can survive without our technology. We can survive good and well, and did for plenty of time prior to the invention of our technology. Heard of the Amish? They even do it today. Just because a life without technology is unheard of in modern times doesn't mean it's impossible. Fossil records show us having lived for quite a while without technology. We even have television shows of people living in the wild just because they can.

The way our genes and DNA came to be out off all the possibility is too extreme to ascribe to mere chance.

Evolution has nothing to do with chance. You should learn the theory before attempting to disprove it.

There has to be a guiding force.

Natural selection.

Most of us have an innate moral code instilled in us naturally, animals don't so there has to be something more to us.

Many animals do, and evolutionary psychology explains morals perfectly.

Not all religion is correct, very few are even close. Roman Catholicism is closer than most would think, but everyone makes it out to be crazy.

Every religion is based on faith, with no objective evidence. To say that one is closer than the other is nothing but opinion.

@Gamer: Prayer absolutely can help your arm heal faster. There was a scientific study done with Buddist monks. They prayed for 30 minutes over a dead battery and caused it to recharge it. In another instance scientist have studied monks that offer healing therapies with prayer. These guys can heat rolled up aluminum foil with their minds and use chi points to heal.

Originally Posted by American Cancer Society

Available scientific evidence does not support claims that faith healing can cure cancer or any other disease. Even the "miraculous" cures at the French shrine of Lourdes, after careful study by the Catholic Church, do not outnumber the historical percentage of spontaneous remissions seen among people with cancer. However, faith healing may promote peace of mind, reduce stress, relieve pain and anxiety, and strengthen the will to live.

All of which are mental things. source

Originally Posted by Cochrane review

We found 10 studies, in which more than 7000 participants were randomly allocated to either be prayed for, or not. Most of the studies show no significant differences in the health related outcomes of patients who were allocated to be prayed for and those who allocated to the other group.

Statistically insignificant. source

Originally Posted by American Heart Journal

In the 2 groups uncertain about receiving intercessory prayer, complications occurred in 52% (315/604) of patients who received intercessory prayer versus 51% (304/597) of those who did not (relative risk 1.02, 95% CI 0.92-1.15). Complications occurred in 59% (352/601) of patients certain of receiving intercessory prayer compared with the 52% (315/604) of those uncertain of receiving intercessory prayer (relative risk 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.2

. Major events and 30-day mortality were similar across the 3 groups.ConclusionsIntercessory prayer itself had no effect on complication-free recovery from CABG, but certainty of receiving intercessory prayer was associated with a higher incidence of complications.

Prayer increases chances of complications. source
There are even quite a bit of results for proof that prayer healing works that have been proven fraudulent. But for the sake of space, I won't include them. I may compile all of this and put it on my website for future reference.

There are also documented cases where people have payed and there have been "miracles" where people are healed over night of incurable diseases and injuries.

Do cite.

The real fact in all of this is faith. The human mind is very powerful, if you believe in something it can be made reality. Athletes have died because of intense visualization sessions. The belief in a power ever stronger is a strong motivator.

Which is true. But again, this isn't God doing it. It's the human mind, which is a scientific thing. It's response to whatever belief and it's ability to heal a person of whatever curable illness (e.g. an amputee has never grown a limb back) are scientific and psychological. Not divine or supernatural.

Religion doesn't come from parents very often. Most reject their parents' beliefs these days.

I'm sorry but both statistics and psychological research would disagree with you. That's general psychology material right there.

17 Nov. 2009 03:46am

religion all the way!

**NotNeccesary** · 17 Nov. 2009 03:52am

Originally Posted by H2O

I think that most religions are based on getting people to follow them. You can believe what you want without going to church, but i think church is just a way of trying to convince you that all these things are there. It's just an act.

There is science to prove almost everything that religion says is not. Adam and eve, First man and woman on earth, which would make us all incredibly inbred, and quite possibly one color, what ever that may be. But there is science to prove evolution took place. There is nothing but written text to say adam and eve was ever here.

That's a belief in which we're not talking about :p

And there's actually saying in The Bible that says that the sons of Adam and Eve made sons and daughters which made more sons and daughters. They all inhibited different lands and DNA was there in those times also which made them different. They learned to live differently thus causing different kinds of races, etc. Also, the banning of same sex, or same family having babies was until way later when The Ten Commandments were made. So can science prove that God didn't make the family chain of Adam and Eve into inbreds?

**noob** · 17 Nov. 2009 03:55am

Originally Posted by C0FFINCASE

The Christian religions that interpret the Bible literally and believe in Adam and Eve are morons. The Roman Catholic Church doesn't even believe that the Bible is literal. Genesis teaches concepts and morals concepts, nothing more.

IMHO, as far as religions go, Islam and Christianity aren't that far separate, for those who didn't know, Mohammed received the call to become a prophet from the angel Jibrail (or, if you prefer, the Archangel Gabriel.) And don't lets forget the fact that they recognize and revere Jesus, Moses, and Elijah as great prophets, but don't believe that Jesus is the son of God.

17 Nov. 2009 04:04am

Originally Posted by noob

IMHO, as far as religions go, Islam and Christianity aren't that far separate, for those who didn't know, Mohammed received the call to become a prophet from the angel Jibrail (or, if you prefer, the Archangel Gabriel.) And don't lets forget the fact that they recognize and revere Jesus, Moses, and Elijah as great prophets, but don't believe that they were that Jesus is the son of God.

bingo 10 points

17 Nov. 2009 04:35am

Originally Posted by noob

IMHO, as far as religions go, Islam and Christianity aren't that far separate, for those who didn't know, Mohammed received the call to become a prophet from the angel Jibrail (or, if you prefer, the Archangel Gabriel.) And don't lets forget the fact that they recognize and revere Jesus, Moses, and Elijah as great prophets, but don't believe that Jesus is the son of God.

The analogy I like to use is Islam is to Christianity as Christianity is to Judaism. There really should be more education about Islam in America. There's too much "Muslims are evil because they're Muslim."

17 Nov. 2009 08:29pm

Science.

I need solid proof of something if I am going to believe it.
Therefore i do not believe in any religion

24 Nov. 2009 03:07pm

I believe in Science, Its to many un-answered questions for me to say God did this

Thread: Religion vs. Science

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Rate This Thread

Display

Religion vs. Science

Posting Permissions