Arrogance

[naomi24]

Which is the more arrogant - religion or science?

[Androcles]

Politics!

[ll_billym]

I think this comes down to the meaning of the word arrogant.

ar⋅ro⋅gant �adjective 1. making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud - dictionary.com

I think that both claim superior importance or rights in equal measure but the differentiator is that science (mostly) has evidence to back up it's claims where religion does not and (mostly) does not even think it needs evidence or that the written word is evidence alone.

So religion is more arrogant.

[jake-the-peg]

I don't know a science lead by anybody who claims infalibility

Nor a science book accepted by millions to be infalible either.

[naomi24]

Neither do I, Jake.

This question actually arose from a re-reading of one of Sam Harris's books. He says 'Any intellectually honest person will admit that he does not know how the universe came into existence. Scientists readily admit their ignorance on this point. Religious believers do not.......There is no worldview more reprehensible in its arrogance than that of a religious believer: the creator of the universe takes an interest in me, approves of me, loves me, and will reward me after my death. My current beliefs, drawn from scripture, will remain the best statement of truth until the end of the world; everyone who disagrees with me will spend eternity in hell'.

The point is, whereas science investigates possibilities, and by way of explanation offers theories, and probabilities, religion presents its case as undeniable fact, and sadly, it teaches its children that this is, indeed, undeniable fact - but it is not. Religion is awash with intellectually dishonest people who can offer nothing whatsoever to support their claims, but nevertheless continue to tell us they're right and anyone who disagrees with them is wrong. Twice in recent weeks I have asked religious people to offer me a positive argument, but although there hasn't been a single taker, the arrogance remains as firmly entrenched as ever.

[ludwig]

Religion, because of the infallibility thing.

Science says - this is what we currently believe to be the truth, but we're always open to examine evidence or theory from someone who believes otherwise. If it's convincing enough, we'll change what we currently believe to suit the new evidence.

Religion says, 'This is what we believe, and it's not open to debate. If you disagree with it you're wrong and ultimately, bad things will happen to you. Be thankful we don't burn you for heresy like we used to'.

Confusion sometimes arises because some followers of science forget that's how it works and start adopting a bit of a religious mentality about it.

[ludwig]

Naomi, I wrote my answer before I saw yours, but I'm glad we agree.

[123everton]

But religious practices have changed immensely over the years, religion started many scientific institutions and universities.
Scientific proof is always open to debate and reguarly ignored by people who refuse to believe in it's conclusions because they don't agree with it.
Watch adverts for cosmetics "with nutrilium R" and "hair memory technology" science is a broad church and covers a mutlitude of industries, not all of them worthwhile, useful, productive or honest.
If you believe you are better than someone because of the means of your education or belief, if you use either to condescend to people who disagree with you then you are by definition, arrogant.
You'll find arrogant people in both camps.

[jake-the-peg]

Certain religions have changed but even they have only changed in the mainstream.

You'll still find plenty of Christians in the US especially who are literal believers in the Bible.

Islam are pretty solidly in the "my book is the indisputable word of God" camp too.

And there are plenty of Jews who think that Israel is theirs because God says so it their book an there is no chance for error.

Perhaps the situation is a little better outside of the Abrahamic cults.

If you believe you are better than someone because of the means of your education or belief, if you use either to condescend to people who disagree with you then you are by definition, arrogant.

So if someone has spent years examining the evidence over a question, conducting tests and talking to others, And he thinks he's better than someone who got his opinion from what it said in the Bible...

Is he arrogant? or is he just right?

[naomi24]

Of course there are arrogant people in both camps, Everton, and religious practices may have changed over the years, but what hasn't changed is religion's dogged insistence that it is right and everyone else is wrong. Where religion is concerned, as Ludwig says, there is no room for debate.

[naomi24]

Jake, at the risk of sounding arrogant, I think he's right.

[ludwig]

Everton - 'You'll find arrogant people in both camps.'

Absolutely, but we're talking about the systems themselves, not individuals. Religion has to be more arrogant because it holds itself up as the truth without question.
Science also presents itself as the truth, but holds itself open for questioning and examination. In fact it actively encourages it, because that's the only way it can advance.

[naomi24]

If the image on the Turin shroud was found to be genuine, it wouldn't prove the existence of God, neither would it prove that Jesus was the Son of God, so it would make no difference whatsoever to the creation -v- evolution argument.

[ludwig]

"With everything supposedly so cut and dried within the religious groups why do they need help discovering if The Turin Shroud is really the imprint of Jesus?
They should know. "

Because they can't escape the reality that they exist in a world which is dominated by science, and populated by educated people. In the 15th century the pope would have made a declaration on the shroud and that would have been the end of it.
These days, scientists stick their noses in and start doing stuff like carbon dating etc whether the church wants it or not. It's not as cut and dried as it used to be.

[beso]

Science is not arrogant. It cannot be.

Some people who purport to be scientists simply ignore the evidence that does not fit with their idea of the world,.They are indeed arrogant. But they are exhibiting this because of their religious beliefs in their own theory.

True science never believes 100 percent in its theory. Religion can have no other way.

[123everton]

I've aid it before the only thing an atheist is sure of is what they don't know, but an atheist is certain that there is no God.
But yet they don't know what created everything, or at least not yet, so they say.
Some believers await the rapture, or judgement day or the return of Christ.
Personally I'm with Martin Luther King when he said "how can man conquer outer space, when he cannot find inner peace?"

[WaldoMcFroog]

"[A]n atheist is certain that there is no God".

Really? Just a few questions below this one, you find a thread in which all the atheists state quite clearly that they cannot completely disregard the possibility of God and that they are open to evidence. That they don't expect there is any doesn't change the fact that they're still not insisting 100% that there isn't one.

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Society-and-Cul ture/Religion-and-Spirituality/Question768467. html