Originally Posted by
Andy Big Bear
Let's just take it as a given that religion is a non-falsifiable hypothesis. That being said, it's not incompatible that someone can have a rationalist perspective on science but a theological viewpoint on the "mysteries of existence." People believe all kinds of paradoxes, every day. The concept that the two are incompatible is itself (at least historically) a theistic idea, not a scientific one. Science would simply say "there's no empirical evidence to support your theory" without attaching a value judgment. So, maybe its a good idea to cut a theist a break, and maybe not attach a value judgment to proselytizing? Sometimes a "sorry, I'm a _____" statement and letting it go is enough...just don't say you are an agnostic
First of all, I said nothing about religious belief and science being incompatible. Until science can explain everything, it's not incompatible with religious belief that is used to fill in the cracks. I have no idea why you've responded to an argument that I haven't made.
Second, proselytizing has nothing to do with science vs. fact, but with simple courtesy and respect, which is what I was writing about in my post that you quoted. As religious belief is not provable (which is different than non-falsifiable -- religious beliefs have been falsified by objective proof for as long as there have been religious beliefs, see, e.g. Galileo) everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, telling someone else that their
opinion is wrong, based solely and exclusively on your own unprovable and entirely subjective opinion is arrogant, rude and disrespectful.
My religious beliefs are none of your business. And, unless I specifically ask you, your religious beliefs are of absolutely no interest to me.
On the flip side, I got to see some of the quest for the fullerine from a fly on the wall perspective, and I have to tell you, scientists also work from a perspective of non-falsifiable hypotheses, mysticism, wishful thinking, and outright lies to bring people to their point of view.
Then you obviously know nothing about science, or the scientific method.
The patina of objectivity sometimes doesn't hide the fact that people are people and even if their method is clean they are often motivated by irrational thoughts.
As I said, it is clear that you are unfamiliar with science and scientific methodology.