Many people, especially religious pundits who want to knock “cold, logical science” down a few notches, claim that science is as faith-based as religion. I would tend to agree. Those who disagree argue that science relies on painstaking experimental method and proof to back up its theories—which is true, but only to a certain extent. When it comes to the things that science just can’t determine (or at least hasn’t determined yet), we depend utterly on faith.
A specific example of why scientists are illogical, however, is evident: the afterlife (or lack thereof). When you die, if any of the major religions are correct, you proceed to some sort of afterlife. If you‘re an atheist, you believe (mmm, sounds faith-based) that there is no afterlife. Or at least, there’s no afterlife with God in it.
But here’s the clincher: if a “God” does exist, then you are screwed—at least according to those religions again, since the non-believer infidels usually enjoy a fate such as being “consigned to suffer the flames of Hell for all eternity”. 
Nicer religions stick them in limbo or some such dimension like that. What it comes down to is: believers prosper, non-believers don‘t.
So, logically, doesn’t it make more sense to believe in God? Hedge your bets. If God doesn’t exist, like you initially thought, but you’ve pretended God exists all your life, then you lose nothing. You don’t exist anymore, so you won’t be around to figure that out. On the other hand, if God does exist, you lose nothing, because you’ve spent your life believing in God. Win-win. 
I realize that this oversimplifies it. You do have a good probability of choosing the wrong religion in particular; I‘m not saying that this is a no-risk prospect. I also realize that this is not an original idea (I believe that I first heard it from Pascal, but his mind was warped by others anyway).
So those scientists who are atheists claim that they don’t believe in God because there’s no proof God exists—it’s not logical to believe in something without proof, eh? There’s some religious scientists too, who think science and religion can co-exist peacefully, and I tend to agree with them. It is not a one or the other type of argument, and I wish that polarized extremists would stop attempting to reduce it down to such.
Life just isn’t that simple. 
Deal with it.
» 5 people have an opinion
Ben (in the comments):
You‘re referring to one religion: Christianity. Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists, Independents, Catholics: All Christians, but with different beliefs (though some will argue Catholics are not Christians because of their ideas of getting into Heaven which seemingly contradict the Bible).
What about Muslims? Say you choose Christianity but Muslim is the actual truth. Then you’re screwed, as if you hadn’t picked any religion. The same applies for Hinduism, Confucianism, Shinto, etc.,and to some extent Buddhism and Judaism .
oo, looks like my comment got messed up. Wherever it says “rn” there should be a new line.
No Modern Christian religion follows the bible to the t.
I’m pretty faithful that Chrisitanity is right. And I think the Quran says that the jews and chiristians can be judged worthy of heaven as well…
Yes “Those with Faith, those who are Jews, and the Christians and Sabaeans, all who have Faith in Allah and the Last Day and act rightly, will have their reward with their Lord. They will feel no fear and will know no sorrow. (Surat al-Baqara; 2:62).”
A key thing to remember, though, is that a scientific theory is _far_ different from an ordinary theory. In scientific lingo, an ordinary theory is called a hypothesis where as a scientific theory is backed up by facts and empirical data.
Leave your opinion
The Website field is optional, but you must enter your name, email address, and of course, a comment. In order to make it harder for bots to spam my blog, you need to answer a simple addition question. But if you select Remember me, then your details will be saved, and you won’t have to answer the question again.
Formatting
- Bold
**Bold text**- Italics
//Italic text//- Underline
__Underlined text__- Monospace
''Monospaced text''- Link
-
[[http://google.com/|Google search engine]]Bare URLs will automatically become links.
- Images
{{http://imageurl.com/image.png|Alternate text if the image does not load}}- Quotation
-
> This is a quotation.
> It can span multiple lines.
>
> Or even paragraphs, as long as each line has a > before it. - Unordered list
-
* List item (note two spaces preceding the asterisk)
* Second list item - Ordered list
-
- List item (note two spaces preceding the dash)
- Second list item - Definition list
-
t: Term (note two spaces preceding the t)
d: Definition (note two spaces preceding the d)
Descartes proof on gods existance — our hisrtory book summed that up in like 2 lines but I dont remember them.
I‘m rather religious but I still an quite interested in nearly all sciences and I see what you are saying. As much as I believe god should be part of the daily life, I also think that there are benifits to a secularistic view on certain things and that people are losing sight of the benifits of this, even if it is from 9 to 5.
Also it’s not so much picking the right relieigion, several of the mainstream religions allow for others to be saved. I believe Pope John Paul II even said that portestants could be saved too. I‘m Catholic but my personal belief is that if you live a good life, you help people much more than you hurt them, and you worship god, that you will get into heaven. I’d really like to be able to hang out with my lutheran best-friend up there.
Saturday, July 7, 2007 at 1:41 PM