Science

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Apologetics)
(Responses)
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
==Responses==
 
==Responses==
Science has proven to be the only consistently reliable method of defining reality. Science, by definition, cannot consider supernatural explanations as they are, simply, unverifiable assertions. Supernatural explanations have yet to provide any reliable, verifiable information about reality and remain a matter of [[faith]]
+
Science has proven to be the only consistently reliable method of defining reality. Science, by definition, cannot consider supernatural explanations as they are, simply, unverifiable assertions. Supernatural explanations have yet to provide any reliable, verifiable information about reality and remain a matter of [[faith]].  If a supernatural claim ''does'' contain scientifically testable assertions then those assertions may be tested to see if they hold up in nature.  However, even if the tests verify the assertions, the supernatural claim itself will remain unverified until the remaining parts of it that previously had no way of being tested do.
 
+
  
 +
The fact that science doesn't currently have all the answers to every question about life, the universe, and everything certainly doesn't mean that science as a whole is unreliable.
  
 
==External Links==
 
==External Links==

Revision as of 17:41, 24 August 2006

Template:WP-nameScience is a broad term describing a number of fields of study or knowledge. While it can be colloquially used to refer to a number of skills, its usage in this wiki generally refers to the system of discovery and invention based on empirical evidence and experimentation rooted in methodological naturalism. The means by which science is executed is known as the scientific method.


Apologetics

The primary anti-science claim of apologists is that science cannot provide sufficiently accurate knowledge about reality as it relies on naturalistic methodologies which exclude supernatural explanations.

Another common anti-science claim is that since there are so many things that science doesn't have the answers for it's incomplete and unworthy of belief.

Responses

Science has proven to be the only consistently reliable method of defining reality. Science, by definition, cannot consider supernatural explanations as they are, simply, unverifiable assertions. Supernatural explanations have yet to provide any reliable, verifiable information about reality and remain a matter of faith. If a supernatural claim does contain scientifically testable assertions then those assertions may be tested to see if they hold up in nature. However, even if the tests verify the assertions, the supernatural claim itself will remain unverified until the remaining parts of it that previously had no way of being tested do.

The fact that science doesn't currently have all the answers to every question about life, the universe, and everything certainly doesn't mean that science as a whole is unreliable.

External Links

Dictionary.com entry on science

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox