As I watched this video I was profoundly disappointed. I don't agree with Collins at all and in my opinion this video is beneath the quality I would expect from Big Think. It is ridiculous to suggest that religion poses a threat to the scientific method (even more so if one says it is because of some supposed capability of religion to derive truth about nature).
Collins says that "Is there a God?" is never a scientific question, which is once again outrageous:
-is there a common ancestor to all life on the planet is a scientific question;
-is there a set of subatomic particles is a scientific question;
-are there more than 3 or 4 dimensions is a scientific question;
-are there other universes can be a scientific question;
But "is there a god" is obviously not?
What property does god have that doesn't allow probing through the scientific method? is it the property of nonexistence?
Can't philosophy, psychology or simple reflection be used to obtain the meaning of life and the answer to all the questions that indeed are outside of the realm of scientific inquiry?
Why is scientism used by theists to discard all other naturalistic methods and then proclaiming a need for supernaturalism?
The arguments used by Collins are the major ones among the scientific community, but in my opinion they simply are poor excuses to avoid an open struggle with religion and the exposure of the blatant incompatibilities.
Collins says that "Is there a God?" is never a scientific question, which is once again outrageous:
-is there a common ancestor to all life on the planet is a scientific question;
-is there a set of subatomic particles is a scientific question;
-are there more than 3 or 4 dimensions is a scientific question;
-are there other universes can be a scientific question;
But "is there a god" is obviously not?
What property does god have that doesn't allow probing through the scientific method? is it the property of nonexistence?
Can't philosophy, psychology or simple reflection be used to obtain the meaning of life and the answer to all the questions that indeed are outside of the realm of scientific inquiry?
Why is scientism used by theists to discard all other naturalistic methods and then proclaiming a need for supernaturalism?
The arguments used by Collins are the major ones among the scientific community, but in my opinion they simply are poor excuses to avoid an open struggle with religion and the exposure of the blatant incompatibilities.
Comments
Post a Comment