The Forum > Article Comments > Religion and science: respecting the differences > Comments
Religion and science: respecting the differences : Comments
By Michael Zimmerman, published 31/5/2010The teachings of most mainstream religions are consistent with evolution.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Page 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- ...
- 135
- 136
- 137
-
- All
Carnap (something of a rival to Popper) comments that there is a difference between the two following statements:
1. Sea-serpents exist
2. Sea-serpents exist and are on display at the British Museum
Or if one prefers:
1. God exists
2. God exists and is sitting in three pew in St Marys in Sydney
As for as testability is concerned the 2's win hands down. On the other hand, the 2's are also existential, wherein one has to make a determination based on meaning or demarcation (Popper), in the context of the metaphysical and the empirical. Herein, we might ask in what sense are any of the statements valid?
Dear Yuyutsu,
The difference lies in the existential nature of the subject of comparative statements.
1. The star has exhausted half of its nuclear fuel
2. God made it appears as if the star has exhausted half of its nuclear fuel
We can point to the star and measure its composition. We can point to and meare God.
We can't substitute a dog or can-opener for the star, as the subject of the sentence; yet we can substitute, the tooth fairy or elves for God.
-My replies could be a few between. Thanks.