Knowledge (XXG)

Talk:Relationship between religion and science

Source 📝

1203:"Science and religion are based on different aspects of human experience. In science, explanations must be based on evidence drawn from examining the natural world. Scientifically based observations or experiments that conflict with an explanation eventually must lead to modification or even abandonment of that explanation. Religious faith, in contrast, does not depend only on empirical evidence, is not necessarily modified in the face of conflicting evidence, and typically involves supernatural forces or entities. Because they are not a part of nature, supernatural entities cannot be investigated by science. In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of human understanding in different ways. Attempts to pit science and religion against each other create controversy where none needs to exist. (NASIM 2008: 12)", explained below 1209:"Following up on Pinker, it should be noted that it would not be scientifically acceptable today to appeal to miracles or to direct acts of God. Any supposed miracle would (to many, if not all scientists) be a kind of defeat and to welcome an unacceptable mystery. This is why some philosophers of science propose that the sciences are methodologically atheistic. That is, while science itself does not pass judgment on whether God exists (even though some philosophers of science do), appealing to God’s existence forms no part of their scientific theories and investigations." 1327:"The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Knowledge (XXG) to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist. This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources. To demonstrate that you are not adding original research, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article and directly support the material being presented." 272: 755: 839: 519: 498: 1180:
overlapping. Can you provide some quotes from the sources on some of the statements made? This may have a spot in the article, but would be better as you said between History and Perspectives since that is where these epistemic ideas make sense. The general structure of Incompatibility, Independence, Dialogue, Integration are the major sections of this article and those should be left alone since they are based on divisions made by historians of science.
470: 454: 438: 745: 724: 860: 529: 624: 634: 603: 988: 232: 263: 964: 944: 340: 305: 1000: 350: 1478:. "In conclusion, it appears that religious Americans have less positive attitudes toward, and less interest in, science. However, this does not appear to be a feature of religiosity, per se, as the effect is not clearly generalizable outside of the United States." You have to be careful with correlational studies. 1449:. "In conclusion, it appears that religious Americans have less positive attitudes toward, and less interest in, science. However, this does not appear to be a feature of religiosity, per se, as the effect is not clearly generalizable outside of the United States." You have to be careful with correlational studies. 1067:
In science, challenges to beliefs are often seen as opportunities to learn and improve understanding. Scientists are trained to question and scrutinize their own ideas as well as those of others, and recognize that challenges and criticism are an essential part of the scientific process. The attitude
1474:
Also bing is not a reliable source for anything. Just like google is not an appropriate refence for wikipedia. And the last reference you mentioned is a correlational study on religious Americans, not moderate or liberal Americans. Here is another source by the same researchers showing that there is
1445:
Also bing is not a reliable source for anything. Just like google is not an appropriate refence for wikipedia. And the last reference you mentioned is a correlational study on religious Americans, not moderate or liberal Americans. Here is another source by the same researchers showing that there is
1363:* I feel that the paragraph is supported by the sources, since the paragraph is objective summary from sources which satifies "you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article and directly support the material being presented." in my opinion. 1402:
Religiosity predicts negative attitudes towards science and lower levels of science literacy: "Finally, we also tested whether the predicted negative relation between religiosity and science knowledge is mediated by attitudes towards science. The rationale for such mediation is straightforward. To
1652:
Religiosity predicts negative attitudes towards science and lower levels of science literacy: "Finally, we also tested whether the predicted negative relation between religiosity and science knowledge is mediated by attitudes towards science. The rationale for such mediation is straightforward. To
1596:
Just making note that User:Gluo88 seems to ask algorithms or AI like bing for automated responses. It does not feel like I am talking to an actual human being since the responses seem automated, repetitive, and ignore context like failure to provide direct quotes for any of their proposed wording.
1246:
Thanks for providing some quotes. I read that source too. But they don't really say what you wrote in your proposed section about attitudes. They just say that religion and science are separate and don't overlap - they answer separate questions and there is no controversy. These do not support the
1071:
In religion, challenges to beliefs can be seen as threats to one's faith and personal identity. For some, questioning or challenging religious beliefs can be seen as disrespectful or even sacrilegious. However, for others, challenges to religious beliefs can be an opportunity for growth and deeper
1698:
While I like the general idea behind their edits, it is too black and white formulated: scientists can be very rigid and dogmatic (there is a difference between being open to hold debates and being prepared to be persuaded by evidence), it is just that the scientific community as a whole does not
1718:
The abave is regarding scientific attitude and religious attitude, not attitude of the dogmatic scientists or rational and open-minded theologians (as mentioned in the above text:"However, for others, challenges to religious beliefs can be an opportunity for growth and deeper understanding of
1076:
Overall, the attitude towards challenges faced by beliefs in science and faith in religion can be shaped by a range of factors, including cultural and personal beliefs, experiences, and worldviews. However, in general, the scientific attitude tends to prioritize evidence and inquiry, while the
1617:
The paragraph you wrote is mostly correct, but it could be improved by acknowledging that there are different views and perspectives within both science and religion, and that the relationship between them is not always one of conflict or harmony. For example, some religious people may accept
1503:
You may verify the quote in the source: "Finally, we also tested whether the predicted negative relation between religiosity and science knowledge is mediated by attitudes towards science. The rationale for such mediation is straightforward. To the extent that religious people view science as
1293:
The paragraph you wrote is mostly correct, but it could be improved by acknowledging that there are different views and perspectives within both science and religion, and that the relationship between them is not always one of conflict or harmony. For example, some religious people may accept
1463:
This is not a debate on the topic. The responsibility falls on you provide a source that directly says what you are proposing because you are one trying to add something to the article. Is there any source for example for your statement "However, in general, the scientific attitude tends to
1434:
This is not a debate on the topic. The responsibility falls on you provide a source that directly says what you are proposing because you are one trying to add something to the article. Is there any source for example for your statement "However, in general, the scientific attitude tends to
1179:
with the dichotomizing here. For instance, the "Epistemology" article you cite does not even mention religion or faith or science. The source on "Philosophy of Religion" has a section on Religion and Science and it says that the sciences are methodologically agnostic and says they are not
1464:
prioritize evidence and inquiry, while the religious attitude often places greater emphasis on faith and personal experience."? A direct quote from any one of the 4 sources you cited making that specific claim on attitude? If no source makes that specific claim, then it is
1435:
prioritize evidence and inquiry, while the religious attitude often places greater emphasis on faith and personal experience."? A direct quote from any one of the 4 sources you cited making that specific claim on attitude? If no source makes that specific claim, then it is
1331:
The last sentence is important. Otherwise, what is to stop another editor from changing your wording for "their" interpretation of the same sources. If a source makes an explicit claim, everyone is locked in by what that source says and no need to interpret a source. See
1572:"It is commonly claimed that science and religion are logically and psychologically at odds with one another. However, previous studies have mainly examined American samples; therefore, generalizations about antagonism between religion and science may be unwarranted." 1576:"Therefore, by taking such a broad approach, we are confident that we have accurately assessed both science interest and attitudes adequately...In conclusion, it appears that religious Americans have less positive attitudes toward, and less interest in, science. 1320:
Hi again. It is not about your proposed wording being right or wrong. It is about the sources not supporting your proposed wording on Knowledge (XXG). The sources you use should explicitly state the points you are writing about. This is to avoid violating
166: 1766: 786: 1283:
Microsoft New Bing: What are the differences of the attitudes towards challenges faced by beliefs in science and faith in religion, in area of psychology and attitudes? Are the following paragraph correct?
1052:
I feel that the attitude towards challenges faced by beliefs in science and faith in religion may be one of key topic for this entry, and it is better highlighted in someway, in a high level visible section.
57: 1756: 1554:
Gosh this whole thing is a mess. Ok since you clearly are not listening or following to wikipedia policy on original research, this whole section with all of the violations of wikipedia policy on
160: 1020: 276: 1771: 1618:
scientific challenges to their beliefs as a way of testing or strengthening their faith1, while some scientists may have religious beliefs that do not interfere with their scientific work2.
1294:
scientific challenges to their beliefs as a way of testing or strengthening their faith1, while some scientists may have religious beliefs that do not interfere with their scientific work2.
973:
in 2014 Q3. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Duquesne University/UCOR 143 Global and Cultural Perspectives (Fall 2014)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.
953:
in 2014 Q3. Further details were available on the "Education Program:DuquesneUniveristy/UCOR 143 Global and Cultural Perspectives (Fall 2014)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.
1821: 219: 215: 211: 207: 203: 1806: 1621:
You could also add some examples of specific challenges faced by beliefs in science and faith in religion, such as evolution, creationism, climate change, stem cell research, etc.345
1297:
You could also add some examples of specific challenges faced by beliefs in science and faith in religion, such as evolution, creationism, climate change, stem cell research, etc.345
821: 1861: 811: 1826: 371:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the
1811: 223: 1403:
the extent that religious people view science as invalid, irrelevant, or morally suspect, they will be less interested in learning science, both formally and informally."
1653:
the extent that religious people view science as invalid, irrelevant, or morally suspect, they will be less interested in learning science, both formally and informally.
1219:
Ramos1990: "This may have a spot in the article, but would be better as you said between History and Perspectives since that is where these epistemic ideas make sense.",
1008: 1866: 1816: 781: 1801: 1160:
I feel that Espitemologocal Analysis of relationship between science and religion should be a section in this entry, between "history" and Perspectives sections. --
922: 408: 92: 1876: 1856: 1781: 912: 398: 1751: 706: 660: 477: 323: 777: 768: 729: 585: 461: 319: 445: 315: 181: 1846: 1836: 696: 575: 148: 37: 1119:
Bishop, John and Daniel J. McKaughan, "Faith", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.)
1881: 1791: 888: 373: 98: 1761: 668: 1851: 1578:
However, this does not appear to be a feature of religiosity, per se, as the effect is not clearly generalizable outside of the United States.
1492:"Also bing is not a reliable source for anything. " is not the topic that faces us, since the source is not bing, found by bing. The source is 1658:
but at that point you ingored my source and assume that the source context is from Ping, although I did not see the paper that you found.
1500:
title: "Religiosity predicts negative attitudes towards science and lower levels of science literacy, which will be addded to the paragraph."
1175:
This seems quite abstract and am not seeing stuff about attitude in the sources you cited the way it is presented above. Seems like a lot of
551: 1871: 1776: 142: 43: 1370:: If your viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate it with references to commonly accepted reference texts;) 1796: 1130:"Religiosity predicts negative attitudes towards science and lower levels of science literacy, which will be addded to the paragraph."" 867: 844: 664: 363: 310: 1841: 1024: 138: 1360:* I have responded "Thank you for your feedback. I guess that we may have different conclusion based on our different interpretions." 112: 1831: 1101:
Hansson, Sven Ove, "Science and Pseudo-Science", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.)
1092:
Taliaferro, Charles, "Philosophy of Religion", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.)
1063:"Attitude towards challenges" The attitude towards challenges faced by beliefs in science and faith in religion can vary greatly. 672: 648: 608: 117: 33: 1786: 188: 1110:
Steup, Matthias and Ram Neta, "Epistemology", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.)
970: 950: 542: 503: 87: 1746: 285: 1475:
no consistent correlation between religion and attitudes towards science when looking at 60 countries instead of just the US
1446:
no consistent correlation between religion and attitudes towards science when looking at 60 countries instead of just the US
776:
content on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
78: 1206:" Despite the initial plausibility of the Academies stance, however, it may be problematic. First, ..." .... 1504:
invalid, irrelevant, or morally suspect, they will be less interested in learning science, both formally and informally."
1058:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Relationship_between_religion_and_science&diff=1142949541&oldid=1142949185
887:
related articles on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
154: 773: 231: 198: 1269:
Thank you for your feedback. I guess that we may have different conclusion based on our different interpretions.
122: 1567: 1476: 1447: 760: 242: 291: 1646: 1495: 1399: 1129: 1731: 1712: 1667: 1638: 1606: 1591: 1534: 1487: 1458: 1416: 1379: 1345: 1315: 1278: 1264: 1241: 1189: 1169: 1150: 1042: 1028: 68: 1038: 550:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1699:
cherish monolithic ideological unity, and many theologians are very rational and open-minded (see e.g.
1247:
dichotomizing nor do they say anything on attitudes or challenges from science or religion. Looks like
83: 1306:
1. pewresearch.org2. plato.stanford.edu3. pewresearch.org4. journals.plos.org5. nationalacademies.org
1708: 1700: 246: 1468:. The philosophy of religion source you cite does not make such a statement any where in the source. 1439:. The philosophy of religion source you cite does not make such a statement any where in the source. 262: 1602: 1587: 1483: 1454: 1341: 1260: 1185: 174: 1723: 1659: 1630: 1526: 1408: 1371: 1307: 1270: 1233: 1161: 1142: 991:
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between
982:
Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - RPM SP 2022 - MASY1-GC 1260 200 Thu
247: 1355:
Ramos1990: " It is about the sources not supporting your proposed wording on Knowledge (XXG).",
1068:
towards challenges in science is often one of curiosity and openness to new ideas and evidence.
355: 64: 1727: 1663: 1634: 1530: 1412: 1375: 1311: 1274: 1237: 1165: 1146: 859: 838: 244: 1559: 1471:
You cannot just take sources and make an essay out of them. Please follow wikipedia policy.
1442:
You cannot just take sources and make an essay out of them. Please follow wikipedia policy.
1333: 1248: 1176: 1704: 639: 1555: 1465: 1436: 1322: 1252: 518: 497: 1598: 1583: 1479: 1450: 1337: 1256: 1181: 1004: 534: 1367: 744: 723: 469: 453: 437: 1740: 1034: 880: 876: 1077:
religious attitude often places greater emphasis on faith and personal experience.
1597:
The responses seem choppy and incoherent too. Never seen anything like this before.
528: 1216:"Epistemology" entry is for the reason that philosophy and science follows this. 987: 633: 1568:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550620923239?journalCode=sppa
1507:
The new reference has been added to the paragraph, which has 5 references now.
884: 750: 629: 524: 368: 345: 1368:
https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Neutral_point_of_view
963: 943: 623: 602: 1019:
this chapter seems to be missing several world religions, such as Judaism.
659:-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us 1647:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0207125
1496:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0207125
1400:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0207125
655: 872: 547: 367:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to 1629:
Note: I am not sure how you can assume my other response is from AI?
1366:* The above from bing is to get more opinions on the paragraph (See 339: 304: 1767:
Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles in Philosophy and religion
1643:
At one point, I manualy checked source link, provided the source
958: 938: 256: 248: 28: 15: 468: 452: 436: 1156:
propose to add section with title Espitemologocal Analysis
780:, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the 1757:
Knowledge (XXG) vital articles in Philosophy and religion
1719:
their faith"). Thank you very much for offering opinion.
1614:"Hello, this is Bing. I can help you with your question. 1290:
Hello, this is Bing. I can help you with your question.
1057: 1300:
I hope this helps. Do you have any other questions? 😊
173: 653:, a project to improve Knowledge (XXG)'s articles on 1624:
I hope this helps. Do you have any other questions?"
1611:
I have identified the only portion from AI already:
871:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 546:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 419: 187: 1772:B-Class vital articles in Philosophy and religion 1562:does not belong in the article at all. Also, the 1582:Not sure why you are ignoring the updated paper. 46:for general discussion of the article's subject. 1822:High-importance philosophy of religion articles 1807:High-importance philosophy of science articles 796:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject History of Science 787:History of Science Collaboration of the Month 8: 1398:from Bing for support the above paragraph: 377:about philosophy content on Knowledge (XXG). 1862:High-importance history of science articles 1827:Philosophy of religion task force articles 833: 718: 597: 492: 416: 299: 1812:Philosophy of science task force articles 772:, an attempt to improve and organize the 38:Relationship between religion and science 1867:WikiProject History of Science articles 1817:B-Class philosophy of religion articles 1085: 835: 799:Template:WikiProject History of Science 720: 599: 494: 301: 260: 1802:B-Class philosophy of science articles 1752:Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles 1021:2601:5C1:4401:1EB0:A956:86BC:43DD:EDC7 897:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Skepticism 383:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Philosophy 7: 1048:Propose to add the following section 865:This article is within the scope of 681:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Religion 645:This article is within the scope of 540:This article is within the scope of 361:This article is within the scope of 1877:High-importance Skepticism articles 1857:B-Class history of science articles 1782:High-importance Philosophy articles 969:This article was the subject of an 949:This article was the subject of an 560:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Science 290:It is of interest to the following 36:for discussing improvements to the 1226:yes, I agree. Thank you very much. 996: 992: 14: 1033:gah i got logged out, apologies! 63:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome! 1847:Top-importance Religion articles 1837:High-importance science articles 999:. Further details are available 986: 962: 942: 858: 837: 753: 743: 722: 632: 622: 601: 527: 517: 496: 348: 338: 303: 270: 261: 230: 58:Click here to start a new topic. 1882:WikiProject Skepticism articles 1792:High-importance ethics articles 917:This article has been rated as 900:Template:WikiProject Skepticism 816:This article has been rated as 701:This article has been rated as 580:This article has been rated as 403:This article has been rated as 386:Template:WikiProject Philosophy 1762:B-Class level-5 vital articles 1566:reference by your researchers 1015:re: specific religions chapter 784:. You can also help with the 769:History of Science WikiProject 1: 1852:WikiProject Religion articles 1072:understanding of their faith. 891:and see a list of open tasks. 684:Template:WikiProject Religion 554:and see a list of open tasks. 55:Put new text under old text. 1352:Thank you for your feedback. 1043:14:36, 19 January 2023 (UTC) 1029:14:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC) 766:This article is part of the 563:Template:WikiProject Science 1872:B-Class Skepticism articles 1777:B-Class Philosophy articles 802:history of science articles 1898: 1797:Ethics task force articles 923:project's importance scale 822:project's importance scale 707:project's importance scale 586:project's importance scale 409:project's importance scale 1842:B-Class Religion articles 1732:14:18, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1713:07:30, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1668:02:12, 6 March 2023 (UTC) 1639:02:05, 6 March 2023 (UTC) 1607:22:34, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1592:22:23, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1535:21:57, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1488:20:48, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1459:20:48, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1417:19:50, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1380:19:25, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1346:18:54, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1316:17:57, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1279:17:42, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1265:16:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1242:13:32, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1196:"Philosophy of Religion": 1190:05:09, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1170:04:55, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 1151:04:56, 5 March 2023 (UTC) 916: 853: 815: 761:History of science portal 738: 700: 617: 579: 512: 476: 460: 444: 415: 402: 333: 298: 93:Be welcoming to newcomers 22:Skip to table of contents 1832:B-Class science articles 671:standards, or visit the 21: 1787:B-Class ethics articles 420:Associated task forces: 1747:B-Class vital articles 971:educational assignment 951:educational assignment 868:WikiProject Skepticism 478:Philosophy of religion 473: 457: 441: 364:WikiProject Philosophy 88:avoid personal attacks 1003:. Student editor(s): 472: 462:Philosophy of science 456: 440: 284:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 277:level-5 vital article 224:Auto-archiving period 113:Neutral point of view 1701:Liberal Christianity 649:WikiProject Religion 118:No original research 903:Skepticism articles 543:WikiProject Science 389:Philosophy articles 1694:Edit warring by IP 1001:on the course page 793:History of Science 774:history of science 730:History of Science 661:assess and improve 474: 458: 442: 374:general discussion 286:content assessment 99:dispute resolution 60: 1060:section deleted] 977: 976: 957: 956: 937: 936: 933: 932: 929: 928: 832: 831: 828: 827: 717: 716: 713: 712: 687:Religion articles 675:for more details. 596: 595: 592: 591: 491: 490: 487: 486: 483: 482: 356:Philosophy portal 255: 254: 79:Assume good faith 56: 27: 26: 1889: 1134: 1133: 1126: 1120: 1117: 1111: 1108: 1102: 1099: 1093: 1090: 1009:article contribs 998: 994: 993:27 February 2022 990: 966: 959: 946: 939: 905: 904: 901: 898: 895: 862: 855: 854: 849: 841: 834: 804: 803: 800: 797: 794: 763: 758: 757: 756: 747: 740: 739: 734: 726: 719: 689: 688: 685: 682: 679: 673:wikiproject page 642: 637: 636: 626: 619: 618: 613: 605: 598: 568: 567: 566:science articles 564: 561: 558: 537: 532: 531: 521: 514: 513: 508: 500: 493: 427: 417: 391: 390: 387: 384: 381: 358: 353: 352: 351: 342: 335: 334: 329: 326: 307: 300: 283: 274: 273: 266: 265: 257: 249: 235: 234: 225: 192: 191: 177: 108:Article policies 29: 16: 1897: 1896: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1737: 1736: 1696: 1158: 1139: 1138: 1137: 1128: 1127: 1123: 1118: 1114: 1109: 1105: 1100: 1096: 1091: 1087: 1050: 1017: 984: 919:High-importance 902: 899: 896: 893: 892: 848:High‑importance 847: 818:High-importance 801: 798: 795: 792: 791: 759: 754: 752: 733:High‑importance 732: 686: 683: 680: 677: 676: 640:Religion portal 638: 631: 611: 582:High-importance 565: 562: 559: 556: 555: 533: 526: 507:High‑importance 506: 425: 405:High-importance 388: 385: 382: 379: 378: 354: 349: 347: 328:High‑importance 327: 313: 281: 271: 251: 250: 245: 222: 134: 129: 128: 127: 104: 74: 12: 11: 5: 1895: 1893: 1885: 1884: 1879: 1874: 1869: 1864: 1859: 1854: 1849: 1844: 1839: 1834: 1829: 1824: 1819: 1814: 1809: 1804: 1799: 1794: 1789: 1784: 1779: 1774: 1769: 1764: 1759: 1754: 1749: 1739: 1738: 1735: 1734: 1720: 1695: 1692: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1644: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1622: 1619: 1615: 1523: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1518: 1517: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1513: 1512: 1511: 1510: 1509: 1508: 1505: 1501: 1498: 1493: 1472: 1469: 1461: 1443: 1440: 1405: 1404: 1395: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1364: 1361: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1353: 1329: 1304: 1301: 1298: 1295: 1291: 1288: 1285: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1221: 1220: 1217: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1207: 1204: 1198: 1197: 1157: 1154: 1136: 1135: 1121: 1112: 1103: 1094: 1084: 1083: 1079: 1074: 1073: 1069: 1049: 1046: 1016: 1013: 983: 980: 975: 974: 967: 955: 954: 947: 935: 934: 931: 930: 927: 926: 915: 909: 908: 906: 889:the discussion 863: 851: 850: 842: 830: 829: 826: 825: 814: 808: 807: 805: 765: 764: 748: 736: 735: 727: 715: 714: 711: 710: 703:Top-importance 699: 693: 692: 690: 644: 643: 627: 615: 614: 612:Top‑importance 606: 594: 593: 590: 589: 578: 572: 571: 569: 552:the discussion 539: 538: 535:Science portal 522: 510: 509: 501: 489: 488: 485: 484: 481: 480: 475: 465: 464: 459: 449: 448: 443: 433: 432: 430: 428: 422: 421: 413: 412: 401: 395: 394: 392: 360: 359: 343: 331: 330: 308: 296: 295: 289: 267: 253: 252: 243: 241: 240: 237: 236: 194: 193: 131: 130: 126: 125: 120: 115: 106: 105: 103: 102: 95: 90: 81: 75: 73: 72: 61: 52: 51: 48: 47: 41: 25: 24: 19: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1894: 1883: 1880: 1878: 1875: 1873: 1870: 1868: 1865: 1863: 1860: 1858: 1855: 1853: 1850: 1848: 1845: 1843: 1840: 1838: 1835: 1833: 1830: 1828: 1825: 1823: 1820: 1818: 1815: 1813: 1810: 1808: 1805: 1803: 1800: 1798: 1795: 1793: 1790: 1788: 1785: 1783: 1780: 1778: 1775: 1773: 1770: 1768: 1765: 1763: 1760: 1758: 1755: 1753: 1750: 1748: 1745: 1744: 1742: 1733: 1729: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1710: 1706: 1702: 1693: 1669: 1665: 1661: 1657: 1651: 1650: 1648: 1645: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1636: 1632: 1628: 1623: 1620: 1616: 1613: 1612: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1604: 1600: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1589: 1585: 1581: 1579: 1573: 1569: 1565: 1561: 1557: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1506: 1502: 1499: 1497: 1494: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1485: 1481: 1477: 1473: 1470: 1467: 1462: 1460: 1456: 1452: 1448: 1444: 1441: 1438: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1414: 1410: 1401: 1397: 1396: 1381: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1362: 1359: 1354: 1351: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1347: 1343: 1339: 1336:for examples. 1335: 1330: 1328: 1324: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1313: 1309: 1305: 1302: 1299: 1296: 1292: 1289: 1286: 1282: 1281: 1280: 1276: 1272: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1262: 1258: 1254: 1250: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1239: 1235: 1232: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1218: 1215: 1214: 1208: 1205: 1202: 1201: 1200: 1199: 1195: 1194: 1193: 1192: 1191: 1187: 1183: 1178: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1167: 1163: 1155: 1153: 1152: 1148: 1144: 1131: 1125: 1122: 1116: 1113: 1107: 1104: 1098: 1095: 1089: 1086: 1082: 1078: 1070: 1066: 1065: 1064: 1061: 1059: 1054: 1047: 1045: 1044: 1040: 1036: 1031: 1030: 1026: 1022: 1014: 1012: 1010: 1006: 1002: 989: 981: 979: 972: 968: 965: 961: 960: 952: 948: 945: 941: 940: 924: 920: 914: 911: 910: 907: 890: 886: 882: 881:pseudohistory 878: 877:pseudoscience 874: 870: 869: 864: 861: 857: 856: 852: 846: 843: 840: 836: 823: 819: 813: 810: 809: 806: 789: 788: 783: 779: 775: 771: 770: 762: 751: 749: 746: 742: 741: 737: 731: 728: 725: 721: 708: 704: 698: 695: 694: 691: 674: 670: 666: 662: 658: 657: 652: 651: 650: 641: 635: 630: 628: 625: 621: 620: 616: 610: 607: 604: 600: 587: 583: 577: 574: 573: 570: 553: 549: 545: 544: 536: 530: 525: 523: 520: 516: 515: 511: 505: 502: 499: 495: 479: 471: 467: 466: 463: 455: 451: 450: 447: 439: 435: 434: 431: 429: 424: 423: 418: 414: 410: 406: 400: 397: 396: 393: 376: 375: 370: 366: 365: 357: 346: 344: 341: 337: 336: 332: 325: 321: 317: 312: 309: 306: 302: 297: 293: 287: 279: 278: 268: 264: 259: 258: 239: 238: 233: 229: 221: 217: 213: 209: 205: 202: 200: 196: 195: 190: 186: 183: 180: 176: 172: 168: 165: 162: 159: 156: 153: 150: 147: 144: 140: 137: 136:Find sources: 133: 132: 124: 123:Verifiability 121: 119: 116: 114: 111: 110: 109: 100: 96: 94: 91: 89: 85: 82: 80: 77: 76: 70: 66: 65:Learn to edit 62: 59: 54: 53: 50: 49: 45: 39: 35: 31: 30: 23: 20: 18: 17: 1697: 1577: 1575: 1571: 1563: 1524: 1406: 1326: 1159: 1140: 1124: 1115: 1106: 1097: 1088: 1080: 1075: 1062: 1055: 1051: 1032: 1018: 985: 978: 918: 866: 817: 785: 778:project page 767: 702: 663:articles to 654: 647: 646: 581: 541: 404: 372: 362: 292:WikiProjects 275: 227: 197: 184: 178: 170: 163: 157: 151: 145: 135: 107: 32:This is the 1303:Learn more: 161:free images 44:not a forum 1741:Categories 1705:tgeorgescu 1081:References 997:5 May 2022 894:Skepticism 885:skepticism 845:Skepticism 782:discussion 380:Philosophy 369:philosophy 311:Philosophy 1599:Ramos1990 1584:Ramos1990 1574:and also 1480:Ramos1990 1451:Ramos1990 1338:Ramos1990 1257:Ramos1990 1182:Ramos1990 1005:Aashima99 280:is rated 101:if needed 84:Be polite 34:talk page 1035:Nortsapa 678:Religion 656:Religion 609:Religion 324:Religion 228:180 days 199:Archives 69:get help 42:This is 40:article. 1564:updated 1287:Answer: 921:on the 873:science 820:on the 705:on the 584:on the 557:Science 548:Science 504:Science 407:on the 320:Science 282:B-class 167:WP refs 155:scholar 1724:Gluo88 1660:Gluo88 1631:Gluo88 1560:WP:SYN 1527:Gluo88 1409:Gluo88 1372:Gluo88 1334:WP:SYN 1308:Gluo88 1271:Gluo88 1249:WP:SYN 1234:Gluo88 1177:WP:SYN 1162:Gluo88 1143:Gluo88 446:Ethics 316:Ethics 288:scale. 139:Google 1570:says 1556:WP:OR 1466:WP:OR 1437:WP:OR 1323:WP:OR 1253:WP:OR 269:This 182:JSTOR 143:books 97:Seek 1728:talk 1709:talk 1664:talk 1635:talk 1603:talk 1588:talk 1558:and 1531:talk 1484:talk 1455:talk 1413:talk 1376:talk 1342:talk 1312:talk 1275:talk 1261:talk 1251:and 1238:talk 1186:talk 1166:talk 1147:talk 1039:talk 1025:talk 995:and 913:High 883:and 812:High 667:and 665:good 576:High 399:High 175:FENS 149:news 86:and 1711:) 1703:). 1011:). 697:Top 669:1.0 189:TWL 1743:: 1730:) 1722:-- 1666:) 1649:, 1637:) 1605:) 1590:) 1533:) 1525:-- 1486:) 1457:) 1415:) 1407:-- 1378:) 1344:) 1325:- 1314:) 1277:) 1263:) 1240:) 1188:) 1168:) 1149:) 1141:-- 1041:) 1027:) 879:, 875:, 426:/ 322:/ 318:/ 314:: 226:: 218:, 214:, 210:, 206:, 169:) 67:; 1726:( 1707:( 1662:( 1633:( 1601:( 1586:( 1580:" 1529:( 1482:( 1453:( 1411:( 1374:( 1340:( 1310:( 1273:( 1259:( 1255:. 1236:( 1184:( 1164:( 1145:( 1132:. 1056:[ 1037:( 1023:( 1007:( 925:. 824:. 790:. 709:. 588:. 411:. 294:: 220:5 216:4 212:3 208:2 204:1 201:: 185:· 179:· 171:· 164:· 158:· 152:· 146:· 141:( 71:.

Index

Skip to table of contents
talk page
Relationship between religion and science
not a forum
Click here to start a new topic.
Learn to edit
get help
Assume good faith
Be polite
avoid personal attacks
Be welcoming to newcomers
dispute resolution
Neutral point of view
No original research
Verifiability
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL
Archives
1
2
3
4
5

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.