Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
In reply to the discussion: Scientific fact vrs. religious faith? [View all]gcomeau
(5,764 posts)11. I would just point out...
I do not trust it to stand in judgement on the other disciplines
...that the scientific method doesn't concern itself with "disciplines". It deals with data and the explanatory frameworks that encompass that data. And data is data regardless of what "discipline" is generating it or making statements about it. And a hypothesis is a hypothesis regardless of the person generating it or what "discipline" they hold themselves to be a member of.
To claim anything else is, I repeat, invoking Special Pleading. If you accept that the scientific method is valid, then it's valid. Not "it's valid except where I don't want it sticking its nose in because it results in unpleasant conclusions".
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
33 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
A scientist can generally tell you what facts would change their mind about a theory.
trotsky
Apr 2013
#1
No really it is. They are all in The Big Book of Unalterable Science Facts.
Warren Stupidity
Apr 2013
#17
Let me give you the best answer to another question your raise, one which may sound a little
dimbear
Apr 2013
#20