Anonymous #2 3d

Like I know this is a hot take, I just can’t imagine studying science and not having a ton of contradictory knowledge that skews beliefs

1

Anonymous #2 3d

Many of the scientific discoveries came from religious scientists that believed that to study science was just experiencing what god had created, and innovation was part of gods gift so that man could take part in the miracle of creation

3

Anonymous #2 3d

what contradictory knowledge? can you give examples? there’s nothing in modern science that contradicts religion as a whole

1

Anonymous #1 3d

Not as a whole dude, individual little stuff, lots of it, stacked together. Evolution for instance yknow?

1

Anonymous #2 3d

you’re gonna have to give more than that, to be frank this seems like an arbitrary judgement

1

Anonymous #1 3d

I can’t, that’s a whole essay, but it’s just the entire timeline of mankind becoming mankind from a common ancestor with Neanderthals and shit. I don’t mean to be douchy, it’s just that fucks with my head from a religious pov

1

Anonymous OP 3d

Came from, later to be revised with scientific evidence… I get where we’re starting from, but where are we now?

1

Anonymous #2 3d

I’m still confused how the existence of evolution disproves religion 😭 unless you’re referring to creation myths/stories. but most religions use those as metaphors or parables and don’t take them as a historical account

1

Anonymous #1 3d

I mean god dude not religion entirely, science makes it difficult to justify most of the time. I could get into like… space too if you want?

1

Anonymous #2 3d

I’m not asking you to provide every example, I just want to hear even one example that actually holds water. if you can do that, then I’ll try and believe you.

1

Anonymous #1 3d

That’s the issue, supernatural is the null hypothesis that is impossible to disprove, that’s why it’s problematic in the scientific community. I tried with evolution, but that doesn’t hold up cause creation myths are too extreme.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

it seems like it’d be more problematic to be atheist by that logic since being atheist would require believing in a hypothesis that’s can’t be proven, while being religious means you believe in something that may eventually be proven. although that’s somewhat pedantic.

1

Anonymous #1 3d

Sounds like agnostic is the key

5

Anonymous #2 3d

if you have an example (or multiple) I’d still like to hear it, or would like to be pointed to a source that corroborates your point.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

lmao, I’m an engineer and agnostic so I have to agree. although I’m mostly agnostic because I ascribe to absurdism

4

Anonymous #1 3d

I think my first problem was not capitalizing that g 😪

1