The similarity of scienctific method and faith

[USResident]

@psyah

Even in religious terms the existence of the soul is not part of life. Life is generally understood as the corporeal existence. We understand that our souls were created and then we were brought to life, the life will end and then our souls will enter the final abode.

Science as you say is devoid of the soul.

So we need to be content with the explanation and agree once more that science and religion are in agreement that the life of this world is what life in general means.

Backing up to the discovery of DNA we ask the question “so what is the significance that all life forms share the same units of life matter?” Or “What can we conclude or hypothesise from this discovery?”

The obvious one is that we see that religion will use this as evidence to suggest that:

Since all life is similar or shares common traits it therefore suggests that a God exists the one Who created all life. More fundamentally each atom shares it nature with the next meaning that all matter must have come from a common source.

Science when done properly will come up with two postulates

1. All life is related therefore life forms vary due to genetic mutation
2. All life is related therfore there will be a common factor to all life

Modern science tends to leave number 2 to be entertained by the religious, whereas it tries to find factors to support position 1). In in some cases there is some evidence. What needs to be noted however is that the evidence thus produced has not eliminated position 2) and until it can be found that position 2) is incorrect then God cannot be denied by science as a possibility.

For faith is wrong is it requires us to believe in something impossible, but if it is possible even slightly then we must accept it provided our scriptures say so.

{ For another side discussion as opened some time ago in philosophy is that a body on life support is functional but the soul is not there … another person could be sleeping and the only difference is that one is on life support the other is not. So what is the soul? Is it the life support system that exists in a domain outside our sphere of interaction and measurement? This is a concept rather derogatorily termed by some as Ghost in the Machine Mind–body dualism - Wikipedia}

Th reason why I actually like the idea of human dualism is because it defines us as that which is not single - alone … which by and by is the defintion of the Abrahamic God … the fact that we can be dualistic systems means that we cannot be One which means Only God is One …

Of course just like Darwinism … Dualism is begging for an upgrade so if there is such a thing as neo-dualism it is probably worth expounding upon.

So then we agree that Soul and life are not defined the same. Life will only be taken to means biological existence.

The points can be interpreted differently based on what context they are placed in. All life can be related and yet possess a common factor. This common factor cannot be classified as a Species whereas for life to be related in different life forms, it is termed the evolution of species. For instance, Neanderthals have been classified differently from Homo-sapiens based on DNA analysis yet still classified as Homo-erectus. I think scientific endeavours are forging ahead in both postulates 1 and 2 yet with a different goal, one different from religion. I think when we get to Hypothesizing, we can touch base here.

Human dualism might be something we visit when we discuss Data/gathering since it involves separating data about life within a biological entity and the soul (can science even gather data about it or not, to what extent does religion offer data on our soul).

So lets close the “Phenomena” discussion with the agreement that science and religion both define Life as the phenomena of our biological existence. Science has not definition of the Phenomena of a soul though or lets see it if does.

One thing I would like to fall back on is that our genetic makeup though constitutes a basic building block of our biological existence but does not tie us or plants together as alive because dead organisms also possess DNA and yet cannot clasify them as alive. Yet without DNA life is not possible for us or plants.

Ready for the next point. I’ll let you open the discussion on it.