leeching from science

january SG

i realize many religions are leeching scientific progress and theories to explain their own teachings..

so i hope people can discern between claims of various teachings

SturmDerSchatten SG

Opinion. Got any proof?

Herzog_Zwei SG

You should see how AEN profusely try and claim that Buddhism is scientific and faith is scientific.

Phaze SG

I think problem is that although some scientific discoveries appears to support some of Buddhism's claims, it does not mean that all Buddhist's claims are true.

Besides, quantum theory is wrong anyway. :p It's just a bunch of mathematical tricks that happen to work. That's the great things about science. We know we do not have the full picture, and we know we still have much to learn. However, because science is based on observation and testable hypothesis, we can still make use of quantum theory even though we know that it's wrong. (I mean wrong in the sense that Newtonian physics is wrong - it's wrong as in it's incomplete).

Herzog_Zwei SG

Newtonian physics isn't wrong but will not stand up to the test of reality in all circumstances.

Phaze SG

Well, as I said, it's wrong in the sense that it's incomplete. Newtonian physics is incredibly successful as long as you are trying to predict the motion of things that are not moving very fast.

It's like saying the earth is flat is not wrong if you are looking at a small scale. If you are building a house, you don't have to take the curvature of the earth into consideration. You can assume the earth is flat.

laurence82 SG

I dont think any theory, hypothesis or finding by any faction would be complete, the only thing is whether you want to insist it is and set a dogma on it.

malayatheist SG

I agree with you that our knowledge of the world through science, or otherwise is merely a drop in an ocean.

But if by dogma you mean religious dogma = 'established belief thought to be authoritative and not to be disputed or doubted', then I do not share this idea.

Science has many theories that are firmly established and taken as facts. But it's still not considered dogma because it can still be cast away should a better theory arise through overwhelming evidence and reasoning. One example is the origins of the universe. Initially, the prevailing scientific opinion was that the universe exists in a steady-state but as more evidences pile up, the best theory we have regarding the origins of the universe is the Big Bang theory while the Steady-state theory was shed.

Another example is the theory of evolution which still stands strong due to overwhelming evidence. If there is a theory which can explain the origins of species better than evolution, then evolution will be cast aside.

But in religion, scientific theories are discarded based on accordance with religious beliefs, and accepted if it fits. How convenient don't you think?