@ Erica Terranova ;;;;\

my dear Erica Terranova ....we are living in a civilized universe not in a superstitions to follow a matter of faith and personal believes.... somebody may have still a matter of faith and personal believe that Earth is the center of our solar system...

do you encourage that kind of unscientific beliefs? as a human being we have right to discourage or to terminate matter of false faiths and personal beliefs....otherwise same personal believes are going to apply on their children and finally complete humanity spoils one day...i strongly object you that only the scientific reason is the ultimate last limitation to validate anything .......

thank you.....

I believe we only have the right to believe everyone who wants. We have no right to decide what others / others / our children should believe.

@ Daniela Sorea ;;;;

my dear Daniela Sorea , if every one wants to believe superstitions ...

1) do you believe superstitions blindly?

2) you don't have responsibility to change those kind of people who believes superstitions by expressing your views for the development of better society?

of course we don't have right to decide what others should believe....expressing of views does not mean that deciding others to believe....

thank you...

From my experience(atheist who converted to Christianity):

1. Real science has a lot more to do with faith than what people perceive. The very foundation of science, such as consistency of the universal laws, repeatibility of the experiments, are essentially evidence based hypothesis that we trust. We can not use scientific method to prove the foundation of science.

2. Science is not meant to answer fundamental world view questions, such as why are we here, what is the meaning of life, etc. Any effort to give a scientific "proof" for these questions are... simply put.. questionable usage of science as an effective tool to understand the physical world.

3. "Faith" is nothing more than evidence based confidence. Some people over value faith as a moral achievement, this distorts what faith really is meant to be. Faith is the minimal requirement for a person's integrity. If the scientific evidence points one way and my personal belief points another way, over time, I should be able to reach new conclusions based on the evidences. Not the other way. Conforming to God's ultimate truth is what faith is. Not insisting one's own righteousness.

@ Lun Jiang

my dear Lun Jiang thank you for your valuable post...

1) you are saying that, We can not use scientific method to prove the foundation of science. i strongly object this point because your claim is completely illogical. because;

at any cost we have to use proper scientific method to prove the foundation of science.....for example right now we have many hypothesis to validate Quantum gravity (string theory, loop quantum gravity..etc)....every scholar has unique hypothesis to explain Quantum gravity but only a scientific hypothesis survives...

2) i did not asked a question why are we here ....

3) logically only a scientific faith survives and final logic is evidence itself is a science....

thank you....

Dear S H S Sussainsha,

1) I do not believe blindly in the superstitions, but I do not think that those who believe are ignorant.

2) I do not dare to think that my Weltanschauung is better than the others.

Science is a system, or method, used to gain knowledge and understanding of the "natural realm." It is nothing more than that, and to ascribe higher attributes to science than it is actually capable of accomplishing results in turning scienc into its own sort of religion, commonly called "scientism."

For example, using the scientific method, we can collect more and more data about ourselves (the human race), but science, in-and-of-itself, cannot dictate what we choose to do with that data. The decisions we make about how to apply knowledge (ie. gained from science) always refer to a higher level of philosophy (of which science is a subset).

If God is defined as a kind of supernatural (above or outside the realm of nature) creature, then science is automatically excluded as a viable method for proving or disproving the existence of God.

Many highly debated topics in our modern society use science facts for making their arguments, but the debate is typically a moral/ethical issue. Capital punishment and abortion come to the forefront of my mind. I am guessing that you have opinions on each subject, but I am certain that those opinions, while possibly supported with science facts, are not completely based in science alone.

I hope these few words help add to the conversation. Thank you for the time!

That is a great question? Keep in mind that science is the most common academic way of getting knowledge and truth. However, it is NOT the only one. There are other ways too to get knowledge and truth and they have their own means as science does. Philosophy is the other way; by the way many assumptions of the scientific paradigms are based on philosophy. Where science ends, philosophy begins; and where philosophy ends, religion begins. The word religion comes from re-ligare (latin), in simple ways, to re-link man with God. So, every discipline/field has its own means and rules, and sometimes they can be connected and they might help each others. Now, answering your question, atheism and theism are 2 philosophies, NOT science AT ALL. I hope this helps.

@ Cesar Augusto Galvez

my dear Cesar Augusto Galvez is there any unification between atheism and theism which are philosophies?

Unification? Of course not. Their postulates are opposed. Atheism is a philosophy that proposes the non existence of God, while theism proposes the simple belief of at least one god or several gods.

It is good to dialogue between science, philosophy and religion for they aspire to discover truth through different means, some mutually exclusive; but trying to diminish the value of one of them by using the other one it is an effort that blocks the open mind and fosters the close mind.

@ Cesar Augusto Galvez

my dear Cesar Augusto Galvez if they are not unified who said us to consider atheism and theism are philosophies?

everyone knows philosophy is the mother of all subjects and all subjects are interconnected with each other.

what is the logic behind to consider atheism and theism are philosophies?

We are factually what we are doing. There exist different wisdom schools in humanity, from where we can derive (study) ethical and rational advice for our actions. The question between 'created' or 'eternal' matter, upon which certain beliefs are founded, cannot be decided by the scientific method. With respect to action, every healthy human knows the difference between good (right) and evil (false), which is ethics. Acting by and with love is definitely the best way of doing.

However, all the desires of our ego are very strong; if we learn to master and balance our egoistic desires, we can embark on your mentioned road of love and elevate humanity to a higher level of ethical action, my dear Hussainsha Syed