I for one am smart enough not to position a drainage valve directly above and within inches of the intake valve, I wouldn’t place a loaded gun in the same room as innocent children with instructions for them not to touch it, then leave the room, and I wouldn’t murder most of the world’s population just because I was disappointed in them.
Science is the method we have that works. And you are still avoiding giving any actual examples. And any evidence that even if science can’t provide an answer, that religion can despite its multi-millennia-long history of being relentlessly wrong. “Science can’t do it” is not evidence that religion can succeed when science failed, especially since religion never has.
Any attempt to actually be right on any subject. Religion is worse than random guessing.
And?
Cite?
three things I can automatically come up with, sociology, criminology, and anthropoly.
We cannot use the scientific method on crimes nor can we on culture. We cannot pick 500 kids, place half in low income neighborhoods and the other in high class neighborhoods and see how their life develops. Why? 1) because it’s unethical. You can’t just buy kids and place them wherever you feel like it. 2) because life is too chaotic and a poor could become rich and vice-versa.
But does that mean that being poor or coming from a poor neighborhood don’t contribute to crime?
Furthermore, we often use the term “culture.” Anthropology is nothing more than a collection of stories put together to create a “culture.” Can we test this “culture?” Maybe we could get a bunch of people and toss them into this “culture” and see what happens. but again their actions or inactions would be from “stories.”
but is culture a real product or is it a fairy tale?
that is what I mean by science cannot prove everything. Some things are either too unethical or too abstract to prove. But do we still believe that they’re real? Is culture real? Maybe, maybe not. It depends on their point of view
ah but humans have fallacies. You can stay in disbelief that you’re perfect and nothing you do is every wrong. However, ask you have seen throughout history and present times, you are not perfect. I know it’s horrible to think that. Humans make mistakes. Atheists and christians would agree with this (well some would).
but isn’t random guessing the cornerstone of science? Einstein, Bohr, and other other scientists have once randomly guessed the theories of the universe. Based on their random theories, they decided to test and determine the validity of such guess.
Isn’t that how medicine was created in times past? We have a plant with certain chemicals, we do not yet know if it could be poisoneous or not, we’ll just guess and pray for the best.
Do not hate on guessing. You may call it a hypothesis or theory or whatever, but it is still guessing. It’s only called science once you test it out
Cite that anyone on this board has seriously claimed to be perfect, please? This type of strawman argument is extremely weak.
To correct your monumental errors would take a thread hijack of incredible proportions. Your last sentence:
Is so wrong that I can only shake my head in disbelief/wonder.
No. Scientists have pre-existing theories and a great many facts to build on; they don’t just randomly “guess”.
Trial and error isn’t science, it predates science. But it isn’t religion either, since religion denies error.
please go ahead. Please prove me wrong then. Instead of criticizing me, please present your argument on how we can test criminality and culture.
if “stories” are not considered science, then how can we test them
Jesus didn’t exactly discourage the woman who washed his feet with her tears and dried them with her hair, or the others who worshipped him in his presence. I think he’s okay with it.
Anthropology is not just a collection of stories. Where did you get this definition of the word?
"I for one am smart enough not to position a drainage valve directly above and within inches of the intake valve, I wouldn’t place a loaded gun in the same room as innocent children with instructions for them not to touch it, then leave the room, and I wouldn’t murder most of the world’s population just because I was disappointed in them. "
You acted like if you had control of creation, nothing bad would occur. So yes presumptively you concluded that you had no fallacies
again you avoided my question, how would science prove the existence of “culture” or what contributes to “crime”
stop avoiding the question and answer it
Wrong. If you are going to continue to misuse words and definitions, misstate what others are saying, and use hoary strawman arguments that are better suited for Chick comics, I see no reason to continue discussing this issue with you. Deliberate ignorance is something I cannot stand.
commoncents, this has nothing to do with the original topic of discussion. Please start a new thread if you want to discuss what science is (or isn’t).
Not surprised. Posters love to say science is the answer to all but when challenged, call names and run away.
please tell me how can science prove “culture.”
Start a new thread if you want to discuss this.
So wait, this topic is on the question if god is real or not. Posters complain that science is the answer to all and nothing exists if science cannot prove it.
My argument is that certain things exist even if science cannot prove. i.e. culture. Therefore the argument that god does not exist because science cannot prove it is flawed.
How is this not related to the original topic?
That’s not the topic.
Nobody has said that.
See above. So with that: start a new thread. That goes for you and for people who want to respond to what you’ve said.