4. Are Scientists always right, consistently infallible?

Article first published:

Last updated:

5 responses to “4. Are Scientists always right, consistently infallible?”

  1. I doubt they would believe that. People are capable of believing all kinds of things and I suspect they have something in their heads that justifies only giving “lip service.”

  2. I totally agree with you when you say “but ultimately one should be careful about how far one goes in the other direction.” if you have got the ‘Fundamentalist’ type of Christianity in mind (where the words ‘severe’ ‘judgemental’ ‘legalistic’ and ‘joyless’ may describe them).
    On the other hand I would disagree – if someone didn’t WHOLEHEARTEDLY embrace the teachings of Jesus and commit themselves to Him then they would be at best just be showing lip service and at worst would actually be a fraud.

  3. It seems unfortunately that that is the case. Although me and my housemates might giggle when an advert proclaims the products was developed WITH SCIENCE!!! the fact is many people will take that as confirmation.

    Similarly news stories often take extreme bits of preliminary research and sensationalise them, then people get confused when a contradictory article is published the next day.

    So care should be taken to understand how science works, but ultimately one should be careful about how far one goes in the other direction.

  4. Thanks Adam for your comment.
    I am not against science – it is a wonderful tool to discover things, and I guess scientists know their fallibility, but I’m not so sure the general public are so aware of the fallibility side of it – hence my post.
    My unwritten assumption is that a number of people see Christians as ‘blindly accepting’ the Bible. For me that is the ‘faith’ bit in something we believe to be true.
    The post was emphasizing what I have observed, and feel is not recognised, that there are people who accept the statements of science without questioning it – a ‘blindly accepting’ it through ‘faith’ if you like.
    I hope I have fully understood your comment.

  5. But both scientists and religious-types are examining an allegedly unchanging source – reality and the Bible respectively – and then making potentially fallible observations about it.

    Thus to compare the source of one with the interpretation with the other is to make a false comparison. The source of both remains fairly consistent and the interpretations of both can be wrong.

    As such to dismiss one as fallible whilst accepting another is ultimately unfounded, at least on this line of reasoning.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *