Bush has entered the evolution/creationism debate
- Thread starter 2-0-Sixx
- Start date
My opinion...
The distinction that atheists make between science and religion pertaining to the origin of the universe is meaningless. Whether or not we think we have supporting evidence for such and such theory of the origin of the universe, it is all flawed speculation. We will never have a flawless, irrefutable, empirical grasp on the origin of the universe. It will forever be one theory being replaced with another theory. There are no real authorities in modern science. Instead we have Dr. frog trying to speculate the size of the ocean he has never seen by using his tiny pond as a reference. People are naturally inquisitive about the origin of life and of the universe. That is the reason we have both science and religion attempting to give answers. The distinction I make between science and religion is that one is based on the authority of the imperfect senses whereas the other is (at least supposedly) based on the authority of the noumenal creator.
The distinction that atheists make between science and religion pertaining to the origin of the universe is meaningless. Whether or not we think we have supporting evidence for such and such theory of the origin of the universe, it is all flawed speculation. We will never have a flawless, irrefutable, empirical grasp on the origin of the universe. It will forever be one theory being replaced with another theory. There are no real authorities in modern science. Instead we have Dr. frog trying to speculate the size of the ocean he has never seen by using his tiny pond as a reference. People are naturally inquisitive about the origin of life and of the universe. That is the reason we have both science and religion attempting to give answers. The distinction I make between science and religion is that one is based on the authority of the imperfect senses whereas the other is (at least supposedly) based on the authority of the noumenal creator.