Once again: Religion and Science

Warren Frank Lamboy wfl1 at NYSAES.CORNELL.EDU
Tue Sep 30 14:11:46 CDT 1997

I am afraid my previous comments were not sufficiently explicit.  What I
was trying to say is that Science uses a specific set of rules of logic and
accepts specific types of evidence in order to draw its conclusions.   I
assume the readers of this newsgroup are familiar with these.  Religion, on
the other hand, uses a different set of rules and accepts other types of
evidence to draw its conclusions.  I see very little overlap in the
methodologies utilized in the two areas.  Consequently, scientific
arguments will not necessarily be accepted by someone operating in the
spiritual (religious) realm, and religious arguments that might be based,
for example, on personal revelations, divinely inspired writings, and the
like, will not meet the scientific criteria for validity.  The two areas of
knowledge cannot be reconciled because they are based on different
foundations (assumptions).  No one can prove the existence of God using the
scientific method, but they may do it by means of a revelatory experience
of some kind.  On the other hand, one is not likely to successfully argue
the validity of Darwin's Theory of Evolution with someone who believes that
the Old Testament contains the literal words of God.  This is completely
analogous to the fact that the conclusions of Euclidean geometry do not
necessarily hold when one is doing Riemann geometry; they are based on
differenet assumptions. . .  . That's all I have to say about the subject.
I have to get home, my wife's cooking gardenias for dinner.   :-)      Warren

Warren Frank Lamboy, Ph.D.
Senior Research Associate, Cornell University
USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Geneva, New York  14456-0462
wfl1 at cornell.edu
VOX:    315-787-2359
FAX:    315-787-2339

More information about the Taxacom mailing list