On 12/01/2021 20:45, Jim H wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 04:50:12 +0000, in ,
> The Natural Philosopher  wrote:
>
>> In the end conventional science versus creation science is about what
>> you find the most inconceivable - a Big Bang N billion years ago in
>> which a broken symmetry started time in the exact way it appears, or a
>> supernal Being who dreamed it all up a few thousand years ago and faked
>> it to *look like* it was N billion years old. Or whatever the current
>> figure is.
>>
>> And those are not the only narratives that exist. And they are in the
>> end metaphysical. They can't be proved to be correct, only more or less
>> useful, in any given context.
>>
>> Its not turtles all the way down, it's *models*.
>
>
> Except... science has something much more demonstrable than "belief"
> to hang its hat on.
>

Perhaps. That depends on what your purpose is. Science is about
predicting the future, better, that's all. When you bother to think
about it.

Religion is about regulating a crowded society,  and giving people in
large societies a personal meaning and purpose in life.

Just as useful in many respects.

Before you can *do *science, you have to 'believe' in the material world
of space time. If you don't there is nothing that science can
demonstrate. There is no future to predict, is there?



--
Of what good are dead warriors? … Warriors are those who desire battle
more than peace. Those who seek battle despite peace. Those who thump
their spears on the ground and talk of honor. Those who leap high the
battle dance and dream of glory … The good of dead warriors, Mother, is
that they are dead.
Sheri S Tepper: The Awakeners.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05