Religion vs Science (2 of 2)


Top comments

{{ annotation.praises_count }} Likes
{{ annotation.creator_alias }}
{{ annotation.creator_score }}

There are no comments yet. Be the first to start comment or request an explanation.


read all comments

1 Sahil Badruddin = ""Some may think that philosophy is not based on “hard evidence” such as modern science. But they fail to notice that modern science — with its insistence that all truth be verified by empirical observations — is basing itself upon a purely philosophical claim (a claim that cannot be supported by empirical observation). The famous Cartesian slogan “I think therefore I am” is another statement about the nature of truth and reality. It implies, as a Cartesian may argue, that the realm of the mind is entirely separate from the external world. Some philosophers use this position to support materialism — the idea that only the external world is objectively real. But, if one’s philosophy exclusively affirms the reality of the physical world — made of matter, atoms, sub-atomic particles, etc., then everything beyond that — such as emotions, thoughts, intentions, values, and even consciousness — is unreal by implication. Thus, what is true logically points toward what is real. If someone were to claim that there is simply no such thing as universal truth — then they would have just declared a universal truth and contradicted themselves.""