Do you believe in God or Science?

Do you believe in God or Science?

  • God

    Votes: 8 7.5%

  • Science

    Votes: 35 33.0%

  • both

    Votes: 33 31.1%

  • none

    Votes: 11 10.4%

  • Oh no another poll!

    Votes: 24 22.6%
  • Total voters
    106
Status
Not open for further replies.
Remus

Remus

Moderator
Staff member
hoddesdon said:
^ This is the definition of an agnostic:

. one who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God
. one who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism

see:

agnostic - definition of agnostic by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

So an agnostic could not vote "both", because that involves voting for an option that he\she believes is either impossible to know or is sceptical about.
Click to expand...

I voted 'both' as science explains much but I also think 'god' is too simplistic an explanation for something that probably goes way beyond our comprehension to understand (or science to explain). I'm sceptical of both science and religion though lean towards science. According to the other poll I'm a Weak Atheist. So I guess there are many shades of grey.
 
Last edited:
thegunners21

thegunners21

Well-known member
Remus said:
I voted 'both' as science explains much but I also think 'god' is too simplistic an explanation for something that probably goes way beyond our comprehension to understand (or science to explain). I'm sceptical of both science and religion though lean towards science. According to the other poll I'm a Weak Atheist. So I guess there are many shades of grey.
Click to expand...

50 shades of grey :giggle::giggle:
 
P

pnr

Active member
God created or made science possible. Even science is limited by human comprehension that's makes it limited in its own right.
 
kilojoule

kilojoule

1
People have such an unlimited variety of beliefs and combinations of beliefs that it really doesn't work to have a poll that only presents 4 options. 4 options can not represent an accurate distribution of peoples beliefs. Most people see it as a very grey question so black and white categorys isn't going to work...especially when there's only four to fall into.

The thread is also titled incorrectly. In relation to the science option, as has been pointed out by Flanscho much earlier in the thread; Science does not require belief. So that doesn't make sense either.

I prefer Nate's poll, makes a lot more sense.
 
N0D

N0D

Banned
the results of this poll are suggesting to me a possible correlation between intellect and social anxiety.
 
K

Kristopher

Active member
obviously science can be the only one to conclude as factual. There is no evidence or proof of any theistic deity. also science does not require belief. there's evidence for their theory's =D
 
Last edited:
thegunners21

thegunners21

Well-known member
As many have already said, you don't "believe" in science. It's just there, regardless of what you believe in. It doesn't care if you believe in Krishna or Allah or Thor.It's just simply there.

Also, regarding people saying that science can't explain everything. Just because you can't explain doesn't mean "god did it". The explanation just hasn't been found yet. That's the beauty of science.
 
Flanscho

Flanscho

Well-known member
aNOTfox said:
define science? define god?
Click to expand...

Science: Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.

God: God is often conceived as the supreme being and principal object of faith. In theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe. In deism, God is the creator (but not the sustainer) of the universe. In pantheism, God is the universe itself.
 
Nanita

Nanita

Well-known member
pnr said:
God created or made science possible. Even science is limited by human comprehension that's makes it limited in its own right.
Click to expand...

I agree, science is very limited!!


The way I see it, science does require belief. You believe that you are alive. You can not proove that you are alive, you believe it.
We believe that there is a reality, but we can´t proove it. We can say "I see reality, and I hear it, and I feel real objects with my hands". But that is not proof, it is belief. To make scientific experiments and to scientifically proove certain facts, we must agree on the belief that reality is real. Science can not proove that being alive and awake isn´t an illusion.
 
BlackPuma

BlackPuma

1
^ Exactly. That's why I can't put my faith in either science or religion. The only thing I can trust is the final results that occur in this reality and my experiences with them (whether it is real or not, and if it's real; whether they're caused by deity or not).
 
thegunners21

thegunners21

Well-known member
Nanita said:
I agree, science is very limited!!


The way I see it, science does require belief. You believe that you are alive. You can not proove that you are alive, you believe it.
We believe that there is a reality, but we can´t proove it. We can say "I see reality, and I hear it, and I feel real objects with my hands". But that is not proof, it is belief. To make scientific experiments and to scientifically proove certain facts, we must agree on the belief that reality is real. Science can not proove that being alive and awake isn´t an illusion.
Click to expand...

u wot m8????
 
hippiechild

hippiechild

Well-known member
Science cannot produce truth and God is inherently unverifiable. However, believing in God is significantly more beneficial to mankind than "belief" in science... so, take your laysure like a god on pension and don't be walking abroad.

I'm not even sure what it means to "believe in science" but it sounds like a really, really bad idea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top