{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/17/2016 9:42:29 PM
3
The funny thing is that, for once, you aren't 100% wrong. There actually are people that treat science like a religion. That said, that's not what science itself is. In the most basic of senses, science is the ultimate evolutionary goal of religion as the process for for explaining our reality. The inevitable acknowledgment of our lack of knowledge and the pursuit of further understanding. To claim they are exactly the same is to dispute human advancement, which is folly. That said, imperfection plagues all facets of humanity.
English
-
Religious thinking (though not necessarily bad in its own way) is death to all forms of empirically based forms of knowledge. While true scientists may exist, they are like twigs adrift in an ocean of faith based scientific religiosity.
-
Considering the purpose you've given your existence here, this response is not at all surprising. However, I'll still state my disagreement that religious thought is outright death to "empirically based forms of knowledge". All attempts to find answers are predicated by empirical evidence. One may reach a dead end, but to have traveled the path is to admit life.
-
I mostly agree. However, [quote]All attempts to find answers are predicated by empirical evidence.[/quote] is a statement I find somewhat wrong. The knowledge that empirical evidence represents decent analytical material by which we can interpret reality, is itself predicated upon rational, a priori determinations.
