Im not religious, but I also understand that science doesnt conform to static notions (truth, and belief [in any shape or form] being two of them). Science is based on the guideline that evidence is not proof and correlation is not proof of causation. As such, everything and anything in science should be subject to change at any given time. There is no fixation on anything. You might proceed with a certain course of action based on experimental results the data provides, but we (and scientists) would have to keep an open mind to the possibilities that those findings and paths taken could be mistaken and subject to changes. Essentially, the frame of mind should be in a constant state of flux, continuously questioning everything (established notions and perceptions - the very basics on which previous knowledge/understanding relies). This IS possible to achieve on a regular basis - the problem is, we dont live in a society that actively does this... which is why many scientists and people who seemingly claim to follow scientific line of thinking, end up believing in science (which is quite frankly an incorrect approach because such a notion is useless in science and evocative of religious notions) and taking on even dogmatic perceptions around certain subjects (being less than open when well established theories - even peer reviewed data - is brought into question).
Posted on: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 06:35:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015