Comments on Bad Astronomy Blog » Is science faith-based?

• Bad Astronomy Blog » Is science faith-based?
• If you read any antiscience screeds, at some point or another most will claim that science is based on faith just as much as religion is. This is completely wrong. It shows (unsurprisingly) an utter misunderstanding of how science works. Science is not faith-based, and heres why
  

  In Euclid’s Elements, axioms are split into “common notions” and “postulates”. Common notions are ideas that are impossible to prove, but necessary for any logical framework. An example from Euclid is the notion that if A equals B, and t…

• [2660 diggs]
  [113 del.icio.us posts]
  [96 reddit points]
• [Preview comments ]
  Science is merely the thoughts and opinions of the scientists in that particular field of science. If you feel strongly enough about a particular issue you can find scientific ‘evidence’ to prove your theory.

  P.S. the heart controls the brain…

  Um, flagged as inaccurate??? WTF

  Yes this is a somewhat accurate (the assumption stated is only partly valid) description of the scientific method, but a complete and total fantasy when applied to the practice of science in general. Science is a pursuit by human beings and human beings are incapable of being totally neutral in their observations. This is why double blind studies are the minimum standard and even these are not beyond compromise. The need for double blind studies is ample proof of my opening statement.
  Call it religious zeal or safety in numbers, scientists and thus science is not immune to these forces.

  The current man made global warming debacle is a perfect example. In the future it will continue to be studied to understand how science was so completely corrupted by fear and political forces…..

  “I think, therefore I am” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogito_ergo_sum) - that’s the only thing every thinking creature actually _knows_. Everything else is faith based. If it is too hard for you brain to apprehend, maybe “The Matrix” (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/) will give you some ideas.

  lol @ the buried comments in this thread. The posters of which seem to only be trying to convince them self of there own ignorance

  Faith is the acceptance of a ‘truth’ without needing ‘proof’. It doesn’t matter if the proof is available. It doesn’t matter if the proof doesn’t exist. If an individual accepts a concept as ‘true’ without needing proof, they have accepted that truth as a matter of faith.

  Is science faith based. I certainly hope not.

  of course not, you fucking idiot.

  The religious are well-known, notorious even, for not adjusting their point of view to align with how the universe behaves. To wit: geocentrism, abstinence-only education, flood mythology.

  Yes but 99.999% of the people don’t really understand science. So the must have FAITH in a very small minority of scientists that what they say is true, just like religious people believe in what priests tell them.

  The difference is, you can ask a scientist why he believes that gravity makes apples fall, and get an answer, and try it for yourself, and reproduce his results. Of course it’s not that easy; not just anyone is capable of checking a proof or interpreting particle accelerator runs or what have you. But the fact is, people do train to do science, and then they tell everyone, “Hey, I’m a smarty-pants scientist too now, and these people weren’t bullshitting when they said gravity makes apples fall down.”

  Reality is faith-based. Once you give up your faith that what you perceive is anywhere but inside your own mind, things get a bit wonky.

  Strictly speaking, philosophically speaking, we can’t be sure there even is a world out there. Basically, we can’t be sure if there are other minds, if the past is an illusion et cetera, all that one can know with absolute certainty is that if one thinks, they exist. Cogito ergo sum, son. So in that sense, pure Cartesian skepticism, science is faith-based.