So the initial process of obtaining information is different. I'm aware that science requires an actual testing stage to reveal whether we should regard something as fact or not, but what about theories and hypotheses? Basically anything that explains something to you, whether it has been 'proven' by you or someone else, is a belief. It can be first-hand knowledge, second-hand knowledge, or hypothetical, but as long as it gives you an answer to a question, it's a belief. If someone who was devoutly religious and believed primarily what their religion told them, would you expect them to believe the existence of atoms? Or galaxies? If they can't see it or feel it in person, that 'fact' won't answer the types of questions their religion will. Should we insist upon them that, just because it makes perfect sense to us, it should make perfect sense to them?bi wrote:Mashmakhan:
Non-news: Sorry, but Science Is Not a Belief System.
"In science, we accept or reject based on evidence that can be independently verified; we don't believe."
Personally, I think what is at fault here is what we think the meaning of "belief" should be, and that we shouldn't think of it as something that is not true. But then, this is just an oppinion.



