Comment on Uncovering the Deceptive Logic That Exposes Jordan Peterson - YouTube

• yesman@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  I think the difference is that scientific theory exists even when nobody believes or is even aware of it, while religious faith is dependent on people believing it.

  If humanity lost all knowledge, but didn’t go extinct, we’d eventually reconstruct chemistry, but the doctrine of the trinity would be lost forever.

  source

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    On earth, the trinity would still exist because it’s based on nature. Most religions have it in their doctrine in some form.

    source
• CybranM@feddit.nu ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  that certain things exist until proven wrong

  Mind sharing an example of this? Do you mean dark matter/energy?

  source

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Yes, like ether was kind of a place holder. It goes in and out of favor. I don’t know that much about dark matter but I grew up right next to fermilab. They were successful in their experiments, but that took a bunch of faith that it would work. Same the cern and the hadron collider. Astronomy is probably the biggest area that you have to have faith in, because there aren’t a lot of ways to test it. I suspect that religious people also test their religion in the same way, no matter what they say or do on the outside.

    source

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      No, faith is not involved in science. At all. Jnless you’re a terrible scientist.

      The ENTIRE POINT (well, an extremely important axiom of good experimentation) of a good experiment is it has to be falsifiable. Faith means nothing to an experiment. Faith has no home in science. They didn’t have faith that experiments would work. They had proof that experiments would test something that should be falsifiable.

      If you run an experiment where the results cannot be proven one way or the other, it is a bad experiment. Period.

      Your insistence on wedging the word ‘faith’ in to experimentation is only indicative of your utter lack of understanding of the very core axioms of science itself.

      source

      • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Again, big bang theory.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• not_woody_shaw@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Ok, so i have faith that someone understands this thing so I don’t have to? Fair.

  source

  • realitista@lemmus.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    You don’t have to. You can go read and reproduce the studies if you want.

    source

    • not_woody_shaw@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Yeah, it seems like there’s a pretty big gap between faith that something is knowable, and faith in something unknowable.

      source

      • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Like the big bang?

        source
  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Sort of. We don’t know that there are other life forms in the universe, but there is a strong probability there is. We have faith that we’ll find out some day, but we don’t know right now. To some religious people, they have a faith that there is probably a god and they go with the odds. That was actually taught in religion at the school I went to. So, to me, I have faith that there is an unknown source to everything, but fuck if I know if we’re all the crumbs on an alien’s foot, if there is a pasta god out there or we all made up this world in our own heads so we are god. That is faith that the world started somehow, we just don’t know how. We have glimpses of the process, but we are still making interpretations of it.

    source