Can faith be proven scientifically?

[alice in chains]

I'm not implying is not real. I'm questioning that if something exists earthly, there must be a scientific explanation for it.

If there is not, then how does that tie the relevance of religion to realistic ideas and emotions such as faith? Does it give more credibility to religion?

 

[hart]

I do not think faith is a scientific property.

 

[zen]

Can scientific principles be applied to love, hate, envy, or other emotion? How do you quantify or measure it? Nope.

 

[alice in chains]

Can scientific principles be applied to love, hate, envy, or other emotion? How do you quantify or measure it? Nope.

well..why not?

 

[HK]

I'm pretty sure we can 'see' emotions in brain scans, but that really only tells you how an individual feels.


Someone's beliefs don't prove anything kids believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy pretty fervently, but even if we could show and measure that belief, it still wouldn't actually prove the existence of such things.

 

[BornReady]

Faith regards the unprovable. As soon as something can be proven it leaves the realm of faith and becomes knowledge. Science is a method of study used to gain understanding of the world. As such, science can increase our understanding of human behavior which includes faith.

 

[alice in chains]

Intersting, Born.

So I would take it as something considered faith is irrelevant once it has an explanation? Lol. True story but ridiculous...on faiths end that is.

Christian's teach God as a living reality now. Would they object a scientific approach for proof of God with their confidence?

 

[Minor Axis]

Intersting, Born.

So I would take it as something considered faith is irrelevant once it has an explanation? Lol. True story but ridiculous...on faiths end that is.

Christian's teach God as a living reality now. Would they object a scientific approach for proof of God with their confidence?

Faith fills the gap for religious belief when no otherwise reasonable basis exists...It's the excuse to create a deity in our minds. I'm not saying that we don't have souls. I just don't see any concrete evidence. It's just a sincere hope.

 

[alice in chains]

Faith fills the gap for religious belief when no otherwise reasonable basis exists...It's the excuse to create a deity in our minds. I'm not saying that we don't have souls. I just don't see any concrete evidence. It's just a sincere hope.

That's all well indeed and even beautiful to an extent I'd say, however, why cannot these people take a more logical outlook? If their faith in God is actually strong, would asking questions kill it off so easily?

Not even trying to break Christian faith; more trying to strengthen it by testing it... and gaining a lil' more insight from pushing one's comfort zones... which should be pushed might I add.

Christian scholars seem so whole-heartedly God is creator and these other ideas; how in the hell can they be scholars when they donnot even want to face science robbing former faith based ideas like The Plague being the Apocalypse sent by God as a cheap rationale and then giving God the glory and credit for when something good happens?

Satan is to blame for when something bad happens, but sometimes it is not bad...

I don't think I can respect such goddamn content for ignorance.

 

[HK]

To be fair Alice, science is nowhere near answering all our questions about the universe. We still can't really say for certain how a lot of things happen, or why, or where from.


So turning to science from religion actually leaves a lot of gaps. Religion, in comparison, fills those holes in a simple and easy-to-understand manner, but saying that creation was taken care of by a higher power.


It's not hard to see why people would rather believe than turn to something that basically says 'we think it was like this, but half the time we're finding out how little we actually know'.

 

[Panacea]

Faith regards the unprovable. As soon as something can be proven it leaves the realm of faith and becomes knowledge.

I agree. I feel the closest to scientific faith could get is qualitatively, similar to social science. We can only create operational definitions of certain elements of faith and try to glean something out.

 

[Minor Axis]

That's all well indeed and even beautiful to an extent I'd say, however, why cannot these people take a more logical outlook? If their faith in God is actually strong, would asking questions kill it off so easily?

Not even trying to break Christian faith; more trying to strengthen it by testing it... and gaining a lil' more insight from pushing one's comfort zones... which should be pushed might I add.

Christian scholars seem so whole-heartedly God is creator and these other ideas; how in the hell can they be scholars when they donnot even want to face science robbing former faith based ideas like The Plague being the Apocalypse sent by God as a cheap rationale and then giving God the glory and credit for when something good happens?

Satan is to blame for when something bad happens, but sometimes it is not bad...

I don't think I can respect such goddamn content for ignorance.

A human weakness and tendency. Would you believe scientists who said we are the center of the Universe, the Earth is flat, and every environmental calamity is a message from a pissed off God? Why would this era of people have science so wrong, but have a lock on religious truth? At a minimum it's something that deserves intense questioning.

 

[BornReady]

If their faith in God is actually strong, would asking questions kill it off so easily?

Yeah, faith becomes bad when it causes someone to stop questioning. I like Thomas Jefferson's advice.

Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.

I agree. I feel the closest to scientific faith could get is qualitatively, similar to social science. We can only create operational definitions of certain elements of faith and try to glean something out.

Good point. I think social scientists have only scratched the surface when it comes to understanding faith. Maybe in years to come we will gain a better understanding.

 

[Greatest I am]

There are studies and surveys that show that so called believers are happier and more content than non-believers
There are also university courses that teach that belief is more of a collective delusion.
I think the first observation is true and likely due to our tribal natures. It seems normal that those who want to be tribal will gain from it. It is called community spirit.
At the same time, I think delusion gets involved when belief falls into the belief of fantasy, miracles and magic.
My personal view, because of demographics, says that the huge majority of so called believers do not believe at all and are into it for tradition and culture as well as community.
I have never had it in for churches the way I have it in for religions in general. I like some of the work they do in and for community but I think it destructive the way they teach about God.
Regards
DL

 

[MrHeinz]

There are studies and surveys that show that so called believers are happier and more content than non-believers

This is true. Believers are more generous and have a higher moral standard also.

 

[Codrus]

This is true. Believers are more generous and have a higher moral standard also.

Believers in what?

 

[Greatest I am]

This is true. Believers are more generous and have a higher moral standard also.

As a general remark, I would say that that is B S.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94f2h-5TvbM&feature=player_embedded

Statistics are against you.

Regards
DL

 

[Zorak]

Science is/are things that can be/are:

1.) Repeatable. By anyone.
2.) Have not yet been proven false.

As an example, consider CERN, their work will be repeated to prove its validity, but if they don't manage to recreate the conditions of the Big Bang, many might consider it a failure, on the contrary, it means you are ruling out the impossibilities.