Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Think for Yourself, Schmuck! => Topic started by: Rev. St. Syn, KSC (Ret.) on June 02, 2007, 08:28:25 PM

Title: Found this:
Post by: Rev. St. Syn, KSC (Ret.) on June 02, 2007, 08:28:25 PM
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v60/KatataK/science-vs-religion.jpg)
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Darth Cupcake on June 03, 2007, 11:45:23 PM
Nice. That is full of correct!
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: AFK on June 04, 2007, 01:25:27 PM
:mittens: wearing :mittens:
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: LHX on June 04, 2007, 02:59:38 PM
this evidence is contradictory to the ideas that i have been taught



i will be ignoring this
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: hooplala on June 04, 2007, 08:42:48 PM
Brilliant.
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Jenne on June 06, 2007, 07:36:25 PM
WIN!
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Cain on June 12, 2007, 12:34:21 PM
Seen it on Stumble.  At what point does funding from interest groups that force you to change your conclusion or lose your lab come in?
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: LMNO on June 12, 2007, 01:37:17 PM
Ha!  We need to develop a "realist" flowchart.


Someone fire up the Gliffy!
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Cramulus on June 12, 2007, 03:50:18 PM
I've added this to the BIP wiki's Open Source Map Project page.

http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Open_Source_Map_Project (http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Open_Source_Map_Project)

my one critique would be that ultimately this map is holding up one Belief System (science) as better than another (religion).

Do you think it would be possible to draw the same map from the opposite angle?
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Cain on June 12, 2007, 04:02:16 PM
Actually, there is no problem, so long as religion does not try to make factual claims or explain natural phenomenon.

If we are looking at it from that angle (and we are, because its hypothesis formation), then we have to side with science.

its all in the context.
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Cramulus on June 12, 2007, 04:09:19 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 12, 2007, 04:02:16 PM
Actually, there is no problem, so long as religion does not try to make factual claims or explain natural phenomenon.

If we are looking at it from that angle (and we are, because its hypothesis formation), then we have to side with science.

its all in the context.

But the diagram doesn't specify that this process applies to factual claims, just "ideas" - whatever that means.
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Cain on June 12, 2007, 04:11:34 PM
No, but its pretty implicit.  The link between both is ideas and facts.  The problem with faith is its literal insistence on its stories being factual.  No one objects to the beliefs in themselves, just being told they are true.
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Adios on June 12, 2007, 05:03:35 PM
Nice OP.
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Discord on June 15, 2007, 09:53:25 AM
It makes science look sooo much superior, i miss a lin that says its about  proving facts.
While its implicit, as cain said, many dumbasses will still not recognize it.

Also think about all the scientist that made revolutionary annoncements and later on were uncovered to be complete fake and failure.
Title: Re: Found this:
Post by: Cain on June 15, 2007, 12:28:01 PM
True. 

But you don't get many scientists still insisting that Cold Fusion works, or that the Universe is comprised of ether.