Comments on: Faith versus the scientific method

By: Science, Reason & Rationality

Science, Reason & Rationality — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 10:06:26 +0000

This article has been updated at this link:

http://critical-critique.blogspot.com/2008/03/faith-versus-scientific-method.html

Thanks,
Nick

By: http://critical-critique.blogspot.com

http://critical-critique.blogspot.com — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:15:58 +0000

I’m always amazed with how people come up with excuses and biased explanations to something they will never will consider the possibilities of error and change…

Nick

By: P Thomas

P Thomas — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 16:24:06 +0000

The scientific method always starts with a conclusion (called a hypothesis) and then looks for the evidence to prove it. For example, the article refers to Believer types as a conclusion, provides no proof in the form of data that they exist, then draws the conclusion that they suffer from mental flaws. The mental state of delusion can be inferred (and the article produces many inferences but no facts)from whatever hypothesis one wishes. It is impossible to reach your conclusion that “all of these approaches are completely wrong. Repercussions from these mental flaws are severely damaging the lives of many people”, as such a conclusion depends essentially on the assumptions underlying your initial hypothesis.

All hypotheses contain assumptions and all conclusions reflect those assumptions. This is evident from the recent works of Dawkins, Hitchins et.al. and, indeed, from the work of Charles Darwin. The scientific method, of course, should always refer to the sources of data but your reference to dopamine provides none. For all I know it could be fictional. Certainly the main clinical studies on the role of dopamine and its impact on personality do not indicate that a clinical trial on the basis you suggest would be of any value.

The correct role of criticism should always be applied to oneself and not to those with whom one disagrees. Perhaps you should apply the scientific method to your own arguments first.

By: Nick @ Critical Critique

Nick @ Critical Critique — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:02:36 +0000

For article update and revision, visit: http://www.criticalcritique.com/2008/03/faith-versus-scientific-method.html

By: Critical Critique

Critical Critique — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:37:07 +0000

From my experience, these and many other points have been used for debates that I’ve participated in the past. Usually, no one will admit that I make valid points to seriously consider the possibilities. Most of the time, ego rules and so, my points are ignored. But I also know, that many minds, especially of the audience, were liberated from the slave chains of religion and believe systems through these debates. May be I can’t convince some individual minds, but at least I know that I’m still making a difference in one way or the other…