Science is a blind faith too.Do you agree?

No. Science and logic places faith in observable evidence. Blind faith would be without oservable evidence. Although, you wouldn't be incorrect to say that it does rely on some degree of faith that the evidence is correct. Science is always correcting itself, as we know what was once scientific fact can later become proven wrong. Neither science nor religious faith can explain everything. I believe when taken in there proper contexts they do not conflict but complement each other if you're open enough to accept both, along with there limitations.

No, I do not agree. Science is no more than a discipline and repeatable methodology by which we bring objective understanding to everything around us. It is not an end in itself. The only act of faith involved comes down to the acceptance that your kilogram is the same as my kilogram or that your litre is the same as my litre .. and such like. If in doubt, there is a physical standard that exists so consensus can be objectively maintained.

Where conclusions are drawn from scientific enquiry, they are evidence based.

Science is a means to an end, not an end in itself. As scientific methodology changes, so the consensus interpretation of the results may change. The worst thing we could do is to stop asking questions or to stop challenging received wisdom.

Many rationalists glorify science as something transcending blind&bizarre faith but I state that science is a blind faith too.Please give feedback after you read my post

~~~ The very fact that your sweaty fingers are typing on this keyboard, in front of this monitor, running with this computer, is evidence aplenty for some amount of 'faith' in science. This proof in in the pudding!!

Anyone can buy one, heft it, tap it.. real, hard, evidence!

And it works, most of the time, but always improving (more evidence of the efficacy of science)!

Knowing this, I need not listen to any forthcoming hypocrisy and foolishness.

You hold the apple in your hand and yet deny it... you do not sound rational.

I do like the warning in the name of your site; "listless fantasies".

You'll not be sharing your's with me tonight...

I think you just don't understand what Science is. Science, at it's very core, is simply the logical method of deciding if something is true based on evidence, if there is evidence for evolution, a scientific person will believe in it, if there is evidence against it, a scientific person will not believe it. You say you want to "debate logically" but you don't understand that science IS logic, and if you disagree with something "science" says ,you have to attack the validity of the evidence, not the conclusion drawn from that evidence.

Now your whole argument is based on the fact we have a limited spectrum of senses. That's been realised 300 years ago and Einstein wrote an entire book about it. Everyone's aware of the limitation of the human senses, which is why we build MACHINES, which can detect atoms , lightwaves, elements we can't, why we PEER REVIEW theories and constantly reevaluate evidence, and why we have a world functioning by machines built by scientific minds 300 years ago, which to this day don't show a sign of being "imaginary".

Your post means nothing. "Feelings" mean nothing. Feelings are chemicals and intuitionary instincts which can be respected, but they are not logical. You cannot claim to want to "debate logically" if your ultimate argument is based on feelings.

Science is an admirable pursuit but its selective rejection of that which it cannot explain or measure is an extremely arrogant form of anthropocentricity.

I have witnessed the 'impossible' on many occasions. So what am I, a liar, a fool, a madman ?

Until Science is prepared to accept that which it can never explain as relevant phenomena it is no more than an expression of ego and thereby not worthy of claiming to hold a monopoly on ultimate truth.

.

Science is the great will and the capability to see and the struggle for seeing. Science is vision. Vision is theory and theory is reflected vision. Science is not a blind faith when science is inclined to detect and to see and to scan the world and to try to improve for a better life of you and of the others that are interested in the good harmony of life of presence of belonging and of generously sharing the world with you.

Faith does not share, faith wants to monopolize, faith wants to impose the one way, to decide how you should behave and how you should think. Faith wants you to obey to the high holy most often parasitical deputies of your own God on this Earth. Faith wants that you go the one dogmatic way that you must accept or that is imposed on you. Faith may want to impose material and spiritual blinkers so that you only shall see what the faith does want you to see.

Yes. Can we really trust what scientists are telling us? What are they hiding? Are they wrong? All unanswered questions! How can we trust mankind? They created nuclear bombs, wars, and destruction. They are the real enemies of the earth. We are the one to blame about everything that has happened to us. Science is as blind as faith...

Yet, i choose faith!

It's a great tool I say to explain a possible reality :) It predicts, et cetera, just use it..

"Science" ISN'T blind faith, you can base your faith onto scientific theories though..

From a scientism or scientific realism, you might go sometimes into scientific instrumentalism too..

Haven't had time to read again, it's 5:30 am, but I remember it said what I wanted to say:

http://spaz.ca/aaron/school/science.html

I'd say that reality and et cetera are good blind faiths, a method to explain reality relying on reality is fun, even more if it is accepted in a general setting, everyone refutes themselves onto consensus; "failed hypothesis" are not subjects to rely onto if you want to predict et cetera, even if you forever want to use them... And I find meh that you said "blind", it's quite the opposite, "it" believes it might itself be "blind", constantly re-questionning its theories, and pushing them until they are really perfect... It shall match reality without contradictions.

Blind? I don't follow that. It goes against what the scientific method is all about. Science is unassuming, gathering facts(observations), making educated hypotheses, testing theories, adjusting, repeating, learning, etc. There's certainly nothing blind that I can see. :]

Faith is the unmerited belief that something that has not happened will come to pass.Science uses actual physical items to prove it's hypothesis..