Reply to comment

I've been thinking further about the similarities/differences about science and religion and the ways that they are taught/not taught. Something I came up with is something that we did not come up with in our discussion group but that it would be interesting to discuss further. I remember from our discussion in Prof. Dalke's group last week that she drew a diagram showing the scientific process as believing and debating-- first you accept a theory, then debate it, come to accept further conclusions, then debate them, etc. I think that a similarity between science and religion is that they both require this dynamic-- to learn something, to question further, to learn something new, and to continue the process. I also think that they are often taught in a flawed, simplified way-- that children are first taught to believe and not to question, which is bad science and bad religion.

However, I think there also is a difference between science and religion in the process of questioning. Religions are teleological, they assumes there is a Truth out there that you are trying to understand-- even if that truth is ultimately beyond the grasp of human comprehension. In science, though,  there is no one unified truth, but a bunch of smaller discoveries.