Asklemmy

45934 readers

1507 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Are there people that are otherwise logical but drop their skepticism when it comes to religion? How do they consolidate those 2 sides of themselves? (lemm.ee)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

114 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BmeBenji@lemm.ee 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I’m curious what you mean by “drop their skepticism.”

I believe the universe was created and I also believe that modern science does an incredibly good job describing the way it functions to the best of our ability. I do not believe the idea of religion is 100% at odds with science

[–] ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

By drop their skepticism I mean dropping their scientific mindset of theories are not facts, an experiment needs to be reproduceable, etc. I don't believe that science disproves religion but I do believe there are too many unproveable aspects of most religions for me to be too skeptical to believe in fully

[–] BmeBenji@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago

Gotcha gotcha

[+] letsgo@lemm.ee -10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There is plenty of science with a non-reproducible basis. Richard Dawkins has gone as far to say that evolution is fact. And yet we have never observed one species changing into another - sure, the headlines say we have, but when you drill right down into the source material the best you can find is "these creatures do not normally reproduce with each other". Note the wording: "do not normally". Not "cannot", which is what the headline fundamentally requires in order to be truly accurate.

[–] ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Evolution in complex organisms takes millions of years so no it's not something you'll witness in your life time. The evolutions you do witness are in faster aging, less complex organisms such as microbes which we can practically witness evolving in real time. Evolution isn't a theory, it is an inevitability, those that survive their surroundings pass on their genes, that is all that evolution is.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Also we can see evolution at work when bacteria develop resistance to medications.

[–] ReanuKeeves@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

Right, that's the type of microbial evolution I mean