Question: do you have to not believe in god to be a scientist?
Asked by ferdos10 to Keith on 23 Jun 2010 in Categories: Scientist.
0Short link http://ias.im/17.1913 | Comment on this question
Comments
-
lupusmortii
commented on 24 Jun 2010: God says in the bible”I will not prove I exist for proof denies faith and without faith I am nothing” but if he is nothing without faith then even if he does exist he cant have created earth as there was nothing to believe in him until humans came around and even then they believed in a multitude of gods (but believed in gods of some sort) so he probably doesn’t exist also there is the problem of all the other religions surly if any god/s exist surly they would be the ones from earlier religions after all at least they don’t go saying that they created the world then contradicting themselves later on
-
Keith
commented on 25 Jun 2010: Interesting arguments, lupusmorlii. I’m not sure about the biblical source, but there is something very similar in Douglas Adams’s “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”, where the Babel fish is invoked to argue:
“”I refuse to prove that I exist,” says God, “for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.”I think that the standard biblical interpretation is that the existence of God can’t be proved … and then argues that just because you can’t prove something, that does mean that its not real. This is a valid argument – which just means that the standard Christian position isn’t, to my mind, scientific.
There’s an interesting bit of maths here, called “Gödel’s incompleteness theorems”, which means that even in maths there are things which are true but can’t be proved (if you’ll allow a very loose interpretation). If not even the mathematicians can sort out proof, then tacklingly religion logically is really tricky.
- does your belly button get hairy inside?
- since humanity has gotten taller through history do you think we will keep growing to be giants ?
- why am i so hairy and im only 14 IM HAIRIER THAN MY DAD(no lie)
- Congratulations on being the final two, why should you win the money?
- how many times bigger is the sun compared to the earth
- Hello Emma! We was wondering weather you could tell us some information about micro- engeneering. Thanks
- how many years did you spend at university to become a scientist?
- How do you think the world really evolved?
- why do use humans get told we are like 99.9% of monkeys ??
- what made the 1st ever animal since there was no life to start it thanks luke (1 Comment)
copyright and produced by gallomanor communications ltd 2010
You can still believe in god. You can:
(1) believe in a God whose existence can’t be proven. This would be an act of faith.
(2) believe in a God whose existence can be proven, but we haven’t done this yet. Some people are a little dismissive of this idea and call such a god, a “God of the gaps”
(3) believe in a God whose existence has been proven – in which case I think that a lot of other scientist would disagree with you, but that’s OK – disagreement is very common among scientists.
More advanced pondering (feel free to ignore):
Is the existence of God something that can be proven by science? No, I don’t think so, because there is a very core idea in science that nothing can ever been proven – you can only ever disprove something.
Can God’s existence be disproven?
This concept of refutation (showing that something was wrong) was one of the key ideas of an important modern Philosopher of science called Karl Popper. He described theories as scientific ONLY if they could be disproven i.e. “fasifiable”.
So, the hypothesis that “There is a god” is not testable, because you could use argument (1), above. So, the hypothesis “There is a god” is not a scientific hypothesis, and one that scientific methods can’t tackle.
0