Ad Initium
New Member
Which unbiased scientific progress was made by religious persons?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Aught3 said:But shouldn't this really be called scientific progress made by religious people?
As I understand, he was weirdly religious...DTBeast said:this guy was pretty religious and not too shabby with the Science http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton
I agree. It's not religion doing the scientific progress, but the religious people.Aught3 said:But shouldn't this really be called scientific progress made by religious people?
This. Also religion is still the cultural norm, even if that trend is shifting especially heavily in science and scientists.nasher168 said:The majority of the important scientists throughout history would have been religious, if for no other reason than it being the cultural norm at the time. There are also plenty of ones today.
You would have to include Euler. Ironically, not just religious but a rabid fundy.Ad Initium said:Which unbiased scientific progress was made by religious persons?
That's a contradiction. A "scientific progress" made by a religion would be biased towards that religion. Take the "science" of creationism, for example. Or the so-called "islamic science."Unbiased scientific progress made by Religion
As for that, religion pre-dated science, and therefore the early scientists naturally had to have been born and brought up in religious families. Take Galileo, the pioneer of astronomy. He grew up in a highly orthodox christian environment, much to the point that he had to renounce his discoveries and observations simply to hold on to his life.Ad Initium said:Which unbiased scientific progress was made by religious persons?
...progress is in no way related to his religious beliefs.
Agreed. While it is doubtless uncommon, have have no difficulty in accepting that it has occurred.Pennies for Thoughts said:...progress is in no way related to his religious beliefs.
Is this really true?
Granted, religion has done science more harm than good over the centuries, and there is credence to the point made earlier that just because a scientist was religious doesn't mean that religion advanced his science. As with Euler, Newton and other religious science greats listed previously, it seems fair to say that they advanced science in spite of their religion rather than because of it.
But can we really say religion has never done anything to advance science? The case of Johannes Kepler still leaves room for doubt about that.