Faith vs science

Faith in success - in discovery faith in finding new

Edit :
Will and Orv-
Faith they could find a way to fly rather than fall before others did ...

Considering the example phrase 'I believe you'll do something because I have faith in you' I tend to view 'faith' as a high probability but not certain, and 'belief' as an expectation. That's the easiest way for me to explain my opinion on it, I find dictionary definitions often reference popular usage more then practical deployment of concepts (not to suggest mine is any better).

So I tend to think those concepts work better when viewed in slightly different time spans, ie faith to action within a window, vs belief to mechanism of action ie persistent mechanism. So how belief works IMO in terms of spiritual and religious stuff, is that the mechanism is believed but the interface with it requires measures of faith.

And as such scientific method serves them both equally when applied - but that those things tend to serve in the absence of science, be it tools available, information available, or time enough to deploy tools and information..

The body of science though, well IMO that depends on various criteria like any other source of information, what were the circumstances it was discovered, is it portrayed accurately to what it represents, is it recent, can it be trusted etc... and of course is it relevant. Science can be spun 6 ways from Sunday just like anything else, and at the end of the day I think people don't really pay too much attention to whether the words they use are specifically accurate to what they are saying or a hodgepodge of other background thoughts and opinions lending influence to expression. A good reason to be nice to difference, because your dealing with people not concepts.

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Faith in success - in discovery faith in finding new

Right okay. Are there any particular fields of science that rely on faith in this way to observe and measure what it does?

Proteus wrote:

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Faith in success - in discovery faith in finding new

Right okay. Are there any particular fields of science that rely on faith in this way to observe and measure what it does?

All of em right ?
So hope and faith do play a part -

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote:

Proteus wrote:

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Faith in success - in discovery faith in finding new

Right okay. Are there any particular fields of science that rely on faith in this way to observe and measure what it does?

All of em right ?
So hope and faith do play a part -

Hmm, so are you saying that for example, an astronomer who is using a mathematical equation to measure the distance and absolute magnitude of a star relies on hope in order to do so? Hope that the equation correctly determines the distance and magnitude?

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Faith vs science
Donthe [sic] two live togeather ? [sic]

No.

Do they help hurt or hinder one another ?

They only get in each others way.

What type of science do you believe ?

There are not two or more "types" of it.

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Some say faith isn’t a discipline of science yet what do you think ?

I wholeheartedly agree. A discipline of science is a discipline that utilizes the scientific method. Faith is the exact opposite method and no discipline at all.

I won’t argue for or against but early in time faith drove science - right wrong death life - regardless - faith did begin a lot of “science”.

A shame you wouldn't argue that, I bet it would've proven most entertaining.

Don’t misunderstand my statement - faith is the substance of things hopes [sic] and not seen and science answers the wonder with a constant fact or a constant result till we figure out and loose the wonder. What do you think?

I think this is nonsense of the sort only one could speak who spent no time at all learning anything about this subject. Only through faith can you ever arrive at something constant and never wonder ever again, and pretty much all definitions of faith support that. With science, on the other hand, you never ever get to anything ultimate, because the scientific method is designed to produce models that are practically useful, rather than "true", and since our lives and the world around us changes all the time, so too must our models change and adapt to regain usefulness.

Well obviously there's a belief that the laws of nature etc won't change, and faith in the purported accuracy of the tools being used etc. I guess the scientist ceases to be a scientist when they stop having hope about discovery and instead hope they don't get proven wrong.... so in that sense they have a type of faith that there efforts are not wasted irrelevant modelling.

One can’t have faith in their project ? Their hypotheses? Faith in themselfs - faith in their cause ...?

Proteus wrote:

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote:

Proteus wrote:

Carlos.Martinez3 wrote: Faith in success - in discovery faith in finding new

Right okay. Are there any particular fields of science that rely on faith in this way to observe and measure what it does?

All of em right ?
So hope and faith do play a part -

Hmm, so are you saying that for example, an astronomer who is using a mathematical equation to measure the distance and absolute magnitude of a star relies on hope in order to do so? Hope that the equation correctly determines the distance and magnitude?

Hope his training helps and hope his calculations are fit. Hope that he will learn and hope that can benefit man kind ..
Edit : hope he don’t fail - hope he chose the right job - faith the people who constructed the equipment didn’t fail... lots of hope and faith there .

So, I see we're talking about the personal aspirations of the scientists themselves with their proccess. In this way it's being said that "faith" or "hope" is nvolved in the scientist's relationship with their work.

So now the question is: does the (at least seemingly) objective outcome of a scientist's results depend on that scientist's faith / hope to be what it will be?