Agnostic.com

7 1

I got into an argument recently with my friends(believers).

I argued that a Scientist should be rational and above all this religion and faith things. And they argued against it by listing great scientists who are all believers.

What is your opinion about it?

Ideally who can be called a scientist?

And why science education does not create rational people?

ArjunMahesh 5 Nov 21
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

7 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

I have read every comment. People have wide views regarding the same.

But I saw the movie Einstein and Eddington and in it they say that Eddington wasted his life finding God in his discoveries.

Eddington was the one who experimentally proved Einsteins relativity and space time warp theory.

Such talented people wasting their time and energy in pursuit of God is a loss to the Scientific community.. Don't you feel so?

1

sci·en·tist a person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.

Although I think scientists are proportionately more non-theist than the general population however people can be selective about being skeptical.

1

True Arjun, scientists are believers too. But what matters is what they experiment with.

[cam.ac.uk]

This link is informative.

1

Some great scientists are and have been religious believers. But, what they have done is compartmentalize their existence so they don't have to deal with the true conflict. It is a cop-out device. Still that does not take away from valid and valuable work they have done.

0

Sure, some famous scientists were religous, including Georges Lemaitre, tho first propsed the idea of the big band as a priest for the Vatican. Yet most christians dismiss the idea of the big bang.
Scientists like Dr Michio Kaku argue that science and religion had a "messy divorce" and that it shouldn't be that way. Then again, if you listen to Stephen Hawking, there is no room for god in science. He said that before we new science, it was natural to believe in god, but now science offers a more convincing explanation.

Personally I believe that once you bring god into science and enconter a problem you can't solve you will stop looking for an explanation and dismiss it as gods will, and that can slow down scientific advancements by decades.

2

My opinion is that the scientists who believe don't apply scientific thinking to their religion, nor religious thinking to their science. Their great achievements were due to their scientific thinking, not religious thinking. Also anyone who uses the scientific method could be considered a scientist, but that doesn't make them a good scientist. I can nail a couple 2×4's together and call myself a carpenter, but that doesn't make me a GOOD carpenter.

Education in general- be it science or otherwise- tends to be garbage in terms of teaching people how to think rationally imo. People just learn to be told things and to repeat those things. Can't tell you how many people I went to school with who got straight A's yet didn't have a clue about the how's and why's of the subject matter. But yeah, that's why I think science education doesn't always generate rational people.

2

Historically, most scientists were using science to try to prove that god exists. They obviously failed.

If you watch the Jim Jefferies show, you'll know that anyone can call themselves a scientist if they just analyze data like the bloke from the Great Barrier Reef episode.

No education will create rational people. Rational thoughts do. People aren't taught to think rationally in school, just to regurgitate the items they were presented.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:4561
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.