Originally Posted by frosty
Stating that "God exists" is a philosophical statement. Nothing whatsoever to do with science.
When a student does science, they can be awarded a PhD - Doctor of
Philosophy. It is rational to say, then, that in the thinkers in the thinging houses think that
science is a philosopical pursuit. Disagree with me? Then go argue with the all the universities of the world.
Here's a challenge for you ... how about you use science to prove conclusively what you had for breakfast this morning.
Conclusively? What degree of
conclusivity would suffice?
1. 0.05 (statistically)
2. Beyond reasonable doubt (legally.)
3. On the balance of probability (civil action: 50-50.)
4. Absolutely
5. Existentially
6. Theoillogically
7. My mum said.
8. Nepharious hand waving.
Horses for courses. Science is really good at making and stitching together observations, but without philosophy underpinning it its just a complete waste of time.
With all that "stitching" and "underpinning" you should stick to your knitting.
You have it the wrong way around. Practical philosophy must be based in science, not the other way around. In philosophy you to striving to
not make unexamined assumptions before using them in a logical argument. You cannot make a leap based on faith or an analogy. The way to examine the veracity your assumptions is by the scientific method. ie test it in the real world.
You have no business declaring god as being "true,"
because, all you have is the untestable
feeling - which we call faith - in god being true.
Keep that horse of
yours on
your course because you have it hitched behind your cart and will cause an accident.
I have a question (an easy one). What is your definition of "God?" I need a target.