The problem with your post is that you fail to acknowledge that scientists worthy of the name recognize that religions are about things, subjects, that by their nature remain outside of science - they have to or they wouldn't be religions. The only occasion for opposition is when religions claim truth for their beliefs, which truth is never demonstrable and remains a case for very special pleading.However, atheistic scientists are scientists that tend to objectively analyse the truth value of things including religion; — VoidDetector
The problem with your post is that you fail to acknowledge that scientists worthy of the name recognize that religions are about things, subjects, that by their nature remain outside of science - they have to or they wouldn't be religions. — tim wood
Atheism does not merely concern rejecting deities — VoidDetector
And science has no necessary connection to atheism. A lot of scientists are religious believers, though a much smaller percentage than non-scientists who are religious believers. — Terrapin Station
This continues to be the case. But it does not mean that science is atheistic; rather, that science is agnostic. — Herg
For every scientist that’s an atheist, there’s another that’s not, and the difference between them is not something that can be discerned by science. — Wayfarer
scientists worthy of the name recognize that religions are about things, subjects, that by their nature remain outside of science - they have to or they wouldn't be religions. The only occasion for opposition is when religions claim truth for their beliefs, which truth is never demonstrable and remains a case for very special pleading. — tim wood
Well, or you could read the surveys about religious beliefs among scientists.
What part, specifically, do you think is wrong in what you're quoting?
Presumably you don't think that both of these are wrong, though, do you? "A lot of scientists are religious believers" and "the percentage of scientists who are religious believes is much smaller than the percentage of non-scientists who are religious believers" — Terrapin Station
compared to ratios of atheists to theists in general community. — VoidDetector
That part, for example, is something that I said, that you quoted, and that you responded was wrong. — Terrapin Station
there are more atheists in the scientific community, compared to the general public. — VoidDetector
scientists worthy of the name recognize that religions are about things, subjects, that by their nature remain outside of science - they have to or they wouldn't be religions. The only occasion for opposition is when religions claim truth for their beliefs, which truth is never demonstrable and remains a case for very special pleading.
— tim wood
[ My highlighting.] :up: — Pattern-chaser
Do you think the stats mean that? — Terrapin Station
I guess you mean that the underlying physical reality does not change — DiegoT
But you didn't answer my earlier question. Or questions, rather. — Terrapin Station
I answered, with sources too. — VoidDetector
This does not mean I am saying religious scientists can't exist. However, atheistic scientists are scientists that tend to objectively analyse the truth value of things including religion; they precisely align with the scientific endeavour of disregarding religious endeavour. This contrasts non-atheistic scientists on this matter, who disregard or "turn off" scientific endeavour while analyzing religion. — VoidDetector
The problem with atheistic scientists analyzing the truth value of religions is that they are usually more literal and fundamentalist about analyzing religious texts than many if not most religious believers. Instead of looking to or for the moral of a myth, legend, story, or parable (Yes, there is even Christian mythology. Only the dolts take it literally.); the atheist debunks the most literal interpretation of the text. That’s why so many atheists think the religious are stupid, or they think we are deluding ourselves. This is a mistake that religious texts can’t impart wisdom and that science alone can address all truths wrt humanity. — Noah Te Stroete
The Internet can’t give you a guide on how to live a good life by itself, nor can science for that matter, but a religious text can teach one wisdom. I’m not saying I’m wise, but I like to think I’m actively working towards it. — Noah Te Stroete
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.