" Whether you want to believe it or not, you have to have FAITH in evolution just like creationism. You have to have as much FAITH in a giant explosion shitting everything into existence ad you do the big guy in the sky. Either way, you have faith, science like people just don't like to admit it and try to act all smart. Darwin's theory of evolution relies on the theory that a star throw up and created a mass and complex universe (which to me, is absurd.) Some believe it was created, which can seem absurd to others. "Faith relies on the views, biases, and subjectivity of one person within their own perspective to count. Science makes efforts to establish knowledge and truth that trascends our human biases. If we all got blown up, the universal laws of physics would still be there and science can say that with authority. Our neurons firing in a specific pattern as developed over many decades in our lives has no impact on that. The ability for science to allow one person to take a step back and look at the bigger picture beyond themselves is something intrinsic to science and not so with belief systems and faith.
Faith in anything doesn't make it true, it just makes i t true for you. More than likely it makes it seem true for you. This goes for anything as an article of belief, and it happens that religion falls into that category and why religion and science are often forced to duke it out. Evidence, logic, arguments based on probability, and consensus that builds over many experimentation, falsification/verification, and simply time is what contributes to the validity to a scientific principle, theory, or law.
@SofaKing: The thing that I've noticed in my science education is that scientific laws by extension boil down to absolute if...then statements. Within a very distinct assumption or condition, if a certain thing happens, then this other thing always happens. Basically absolute causality within a certain context. That's why mathematics employ more laws than science proper because it is much easier to define perimeters and it's all on paper in a way.
The larger question though is the fact that me believing in the theory doesn't change anything about whether or not its valid. I know the theory is valid and choose to believe it will continue to be valid into the future (where theories are not assumed to be absolutely true going forward). It's not a question of belief. If you knew nothing of the theory or if the validity of it was yet to be established, then belief can very much matter (which must still be based on evidence) but ultimately me saying I believe in it doesn't say anything. All it really says is that I happen to also know the theory checks out and the circumstances where it hasn't been shown to be 100%, I believe it does because it hasn't failed us yet.
Log in to comment