I especially love the notion that “scientific advancement” is an empiric measurement.
:
|
the clear difference between science and religion are logic and dogma. but if I follow scientific explanations, I need to believe what I learned from others. I never saw that the earth is spheric, but I can't take someone serious who believes that the earth's flat. you can only prove those things with words. but there is the reality of language.
my complete pattern of thought is linked with my language and I cannot break off this.
|
The problem with this theory is that all scientific theories or explanations can be independently verified. It’s all well and good saying “I have to believe what others have told me”, but you can test and observe a lot of the fundamentals (mathematics and physics) yourself.
Science is based on experimentation, objectivity and analysis. Professional scientific studies are peer-reviewed, and mountains of documentation (photographs, video, notes, sketches etc.) are generated.
You worried the world is flat? No problem, hop in a plane or glider, or just watch video from someone else who already did.