Is Science a type of "religion"..since they put their faith in other scientists & their wrtings?

Question

Dex & ara...You're right ..I should have said "trust"...I'm not really sure what the difference is though.

Answer 1

There's a difference between faith and trust.

Answer 2

I watched a group of astro-physicists P.h.d.s all extolling the virtues of Darwins evolution" theory" on Charlie Rose as well as the validty of the "big bang theory". Both at this point are unprovable though generally accepted as fact with what might be described as "religious" fervor, however that in no way imparts them with the designation as religion per se, yet then again beleif in unprovables (say God) is considered a religion, and as such a religion would require the belief in though not the proof of a deity. One might ask these "highly educated" individuals, this rather simplistic question, Given that as you postulate everything that exists as a result of your theoretical "big bang", tell me who or what if you prefer pulled the trigger or lit the fuse? They will; merely blink and stutter as there is not a scientifically valid answer. The fact that a large number of individuals coerce lucere from the gullible as they claim to be a close friend of "God" and with sufficient donations and fealty to their doctrine they will put in a good word for you is of course (I think) a valid reason for disbelief. However...this is unknowable.   gnome

Answer 3

No.  Science is a method of discovery, a way of knowing.  It is the body of knowledge that is generated from the use of the scientific method; it makes testable claims about natural phenomena and bases its conclusions on the best analysis of the best evidence available.  It relies on observation, formulation and testing of hypotheses, making predictions from hypotheses, and following the evidence.  Religion, on the other hand, is a system of beliefs with two defining traits that separate it from other belief systems, like political and economic ideologies: faith and the supernatural.  Both of these actually directly contradict science and the scientific method: any explanation for a process that lays outside of nature is by definition ascientific, as is reliance on faith rather than evidence.

Answer 4

Kind of, but no, not because scientists put faith in each other.

Science and religion do not nessessarily clash, as many fanatics would have you believe. Both science and religion are attempting to answer the same questions "Why are we here? How was the world made?" and others.

The difference between science and religion is the approach.

Religion uses contemplation and meditation, and belief to answer the question. With religion, we could never know if the answers offered are absolutly true. This is evident in the number of conflicting religious beliefs in the world.

Science uses systematic testing and analysis to find the answer. Science may never get the answers, but if it does, you can have confidence the answer will be fairly close to the actual truth. If science finds God, then there would be no question about his existance, because it would find him through systematic and repeatable experiments, studies, and observations.

Two people who set out for truth through religion will likely come to two completely different conclusions.

Two people who set out for truth through science will come very close to the same conclusions. If they don't then they will both recheck thier data, and look for errors.

Answer 5

I don't think so.Religions set a belief system or dogma.They very rarely adjust.For instance the Vatican only reluctantly accepted the Solar System.Science on the other hand accepts changes more quickly.(Relatively speaking).For instance if a true psychic or ghost or demon were to appear.Science would change as the facts came in.A UFO,Bigfoot or Nessie,you just couldn't hold that info back

Answer 6

No, this is a lame ploy often used by the religious and the anti-science types to bring science and the knowledge it generates down to their level.

The key aspect of science that you're totally missing here is that science (as a method) places faith in absolutely nothing. Every theory, every hypothesis, even every law are tentative and are subject to revision. The method of science makes no claims to truth as religions do, but only to facts as the evidence can support them. Further, scientists don't place "faith" in other scientists' experiments but seek to replicate them themselves, and if they can't replicate them, then the results are doubted.

I reviewed the definition of religion in the English dictionaries, as I have done before, and science doesn't even come close. I do note that some of the intellectually dishonest try the bait-and-switch. One possible definition of religion that has nothing to do with faith or supernatural is "extreme devotion" to something, so they lamely argue that scientists are extremely devoted to science, hence it is a religion. Landscapers are extremely devoted to their work, is landscaping a religion too? Anyway, they then use this backdoor approach to attempt to lump science in with all the faith, worship and other religious baggage. I've seen it before, you did it here, and I'll see it again I'm sure.

By the way, there is a Religion & Spirituality category and a Science & Mathematics category. There's a reason why they are separated.

Answer 7

Scientists trust the scientific method  which implies testing and challenging the results of other scientists to the greatest reasonable extent and exactitude.

Science focuses on aspects of the world that are repeatable and measurable, if not on a one on one basis at least in a statistical sense. Religion and science both look for truth but they are not the same.

That said, some people now try to use science just as religion has been used in the past, telling others what to do and what to think, but that use of religion wasn't religion in the first place either. Its just old monkeys trying to beat a new drum.

Answer 8

Religion refers to a group having some common belief. Though there are some theories that are blindly believed to be true (For example, the reason for our existence) you've had most concepts proved through experiments and demonstrations. So you can't call it a faith as such but maybe people trusting their own judgement. So I'll say science can't really be considered as a religion.

Answer 9

Every answer assumes a different definition of "religion" so you won't get consistent definitions, or even an answer to your question unless you provide your definition.

My definition of religion would include the belief in some supernatural being or beings.  Most religions believe that the deity or deities should be worshipped, appeased, thanked or the like, but this isn't absolutely necessary.  Science deals with observable phenomenon or logically provable constructs, so by my definition it is definitely not a religion .

Even if scientists in an extreme case "worshipped" other scientists (Einsteinism?), you can't conflate the science they study and their attitude towards their "god."  Those are two different, separate things--one is what they study, the other is a belief in someone's superiority.  Their science still must be fact-based, even the conclusions of other scientists.  What you are describing, believing in scientific matters as stated by other authorities just because of faith in those authorities, is simply gullibility or lack of rigor.  At that point it fails to be science.

Answer 10

Science is not a religion ,when we apply science we do not need faith or uncertainty like other religions .We know it will occur ,we don't pray for it .

The practice of hacking the universe is seen by our own sight ,there is no unseen force that 'takes care' of things .When you dump baking soda into water ,it fizzles .Your lack of faith doesn't matter ,your strength of faith is no concern .

Answer 11

Sort of. But in science every claiming has to be proved to be  a rule otherwise it is just a theory. And everyone could doubt. While in religion every theory is equal to a rule. And since recently every doubt was equal to a suicide.

Answer 12

Technically, a religion is a system of beliefs, ANY system of beliefs, that a person uses to explain life and the world around them.  So yes, science can be seen as a religion.  So can Atheism.

Answer 13

The tenants of science are constantly being tested. Can you test a religious concept...can you prove a religious concept wrong and still have a faith?

for instance, what if It could be proved that Jesus Christ died and wasnt ressurected. what would that do to the Christians?

What if it could be proved that The hebrew people were never the slaves of egypt, and that moses was a snake oil salesmen from rome.

Answer 14

well many atheists have made science into their religion, of course that's a generalization, but i know many that do. however science for any rational person is not something they would every follow blindly, it is something that should continually be questioned and tested for reproducibility.

Answer 15

No, There is no faith involved. Every law and theory in science is directly observable, falsifiable, and repeatable through testing. It is knowledge not faith.

Answer 16

Science does not offer a plan of salvation, for those who want to know what will happen to them after they die.

So- No.