1541:(derived from the Vedas), mentioned "nasato vidhyate bhavo," meaning from non-being, being cannot arise, just another way of stating Mathias Schielden and Theodore Schwann's Cell. Moreover, the Shrimad Bhaagvatam and the Garbhopnishada, delve into the matter of formation of an individual. "To obtain a body, the individual, dwelling in a particle of male semen, is made to enter the womb of a woman by means of its karma and divine providence," construes the process of 'daivanetren', meaning how the 'atman' or 'caitanyam'(soul), leave the sperm of the male and enters female's womb to gain physical form, in other words the process of fertilization. Not only this, almost all the mentioned Hindu scriptures acknowledge the concept of "many worlds" or "lok" for example "gandharva lok," "paatal lok," "Vaikunth," "Brahm lok," and the like, many of which are even said to inhabited, a concept that is of no wonder now, with the advancements in the scientific technology. This concept was never even touched upon by any of the contemporary religions, majorly because it āis antithetical to religious quest, or as that which renders this world to be characterized as pointless.
319:
stance, as much as a claim of the existence of spirits and psychism etc. i.e. Spiritualism, for
Blavatsky, may have meant both a defence of psychism, as it has become known today, AND in opposition to materialism. In her Isis Unvelied of 1877, comprised of two books, the first details objections to current science, such as Thomas Henry Huxley's promotion of evolution theory, whilst also asserting the existence of an "eastern science" such as Yoga, Buddhism, etc. After Blavatsky, however, Alice Bailey and others, seem to have adopted a more pro-scientific view...ultimately leading to the harmony between quantum physics and more recent New Age thought, such as Fritjof Capra's "The Tao of Physics". In short, it is a complex area of study, with no simple generalisations perhaps possible to be made. Sorry I can't be of any more use than that... but it does perhaps point to the suggestion that it may need to be dealt with in a section of its own...if it is to seem relevant to the discussion.
501:"Much of the scientific method was pioneered first by ancient civilizations such as the Greeks, Egyptians, Indians, and Sumerians. Later during the middle ages the Catholic church was responsible for saving much of the scientific knowledge from these civilizations, thus allowing the scientific method to develop in Europe during and after the Renaissance and through the enlightenment period. Islam also made great contributions to areas such as Mathematics, and Astronomy. Many of the most noted scientists in history, such as Blaise Pascal, Copernicus, and the founder of modern genetics Gregor Mendel, were devout Christians. The founder of the Big bang theory was also a Jesuit priest named Georges LemaƮtre. Hinduism has historically embraced reason and empiricism, holding that science brings legitimate, but incomplete knowledge of the world. Confucian thought has held different views of science over time. Most Buddhists today view science as complementary to their beliefs."
2083:
it really stereotypes both science and religion than it does clarify the complex views about both science and religion. There are disagreements in the academy as to whether science is really about evidence or empiricism fundamentally (think string theory, quantum mechanics - or in historical debates
Aristoles deductivism vs Francis Bacon's inductivism) since much of those fields are theoretical. Chemistry and physics have lots of theoretical discourse with little exact proof for it. Much of it based on "consistency" with other theories mainly. The history of science has many examples of things not being empirical such as thermodynamics in the 19th century or even cell theory early on. So it may be better to eliminate the whole sentence since it really does not do justice to both complexity of science and religion. What do you think?
1350:
about science and religion - from his vantage point - and 2) his views on how people actually handle the situation at the individual level. He argues that there is no conflict between science and religion at the individual cognitive level because if there were real conflicts between science and religion, then no one would be able to be sustain both science and religion. Clearly people are able to handle both so there is no intrinsic conflict at the individual level - everyone can sustain their beliefs no matter what they are. By the time he wrote in Edge in 2009, Harris was already working on neuroscience research on beliefs and his team's research concluded that
1997:"While religions include" is simply not accurate. Religions do not include empiricism or evidence, as understood by scientific practice, or as defined in even elementary science textbooks, as approaches to faith. Science provides readily available definitions of 'empiricism', 'evidence' and even 'reason'. They do not and cannot conform with religious understandings. If the sentiment of this sentence is important, it is necessary to define 'empiricism' and 'evidence' for religions where they exist. Otherwise, as the sentence stands, it gives the profoundly misleading impression that religious thinking engages in scientific practice
2151:
foundation of any of these cultures (for instance the number of shrines in Asia, the number of
Churches in North America and Europe do indicate that they are a force in those societies). I don't think the statement you quoted is saying something not covered throughout the article since the article does delve into the histories of people who had particular beliefs that related to their studies of nature. I suppose that since modern English speaker societies generally think in terms of religious/secular dichotomies the statement is merely saying that cultures that were not like most modern societies - secular.
1663:@PaleoNeonate: I feel that "Fitting" the original religious ideas in the current scientific ones is the only way that a comparison can be drawn between the religion and science. Isn't that what has been done through out in this article? If there is another way, please suggest. Also, these sources are from a Journal devoted to the the topic and the observations and conclusions drawn are not my own. Moreover, I suggest you read the sentence with "aatman." That is not meant in a supernatural context, rather it only shows how the particular scripture mentioned talks about child birth.
210:
of human consciousness. The practice of various "spiritual techniques" (e.g. meditation, repetition of words or verses, austerities, etc.) appears to lead aspirants into predictable states of mind (or the lack thereof); attaining such states does not rely on faith, but on practice in accordance with the teachings of those who have attained them before. This is empiricism at its finest, no different from conducting an experiment repeatedly and cataloguing the results. Ought the beginning of the article not be amended to make this clear?
1537:, that was composed sometime between the 9th and the 11th century C.E, "is designed in a manner that suggests relationship between science and religion," indicating to the fact that it puts a lot of emphasis on the study of nature to be a necessary precondition to understand the creator. The greatest minds of the time had indulged into answering questions related to all aspects of life, be it the human body or any other natural phenomena. The Vedanta are probably the first writings examining the complexities of the neural system. The
1802:, not just the marginal probabilities, in order to asses the influence that religiosity might have on winning such prizes. As the book where these data originate from mentions in relation to Jews: even though their absolute number of prizes is less than the number of prizes awarded to Christians; Jews still are much better than Christians at winning them, in proportion to their total populations. The same reasoning should be extended to all confessions.
31:
505:
matter. Then it moves on to give an opinion but without any citation about
Hinduism "Hinduism has historically embraced empiricism, holding that science brings legitimate, but incomplete knowledge of the world". The last one is even more in-appropriate and adds no value " Confucian thought has held different views of science over time". In short the introduction is a disparate concotion of folklores without citations.
541:. Even sacredness requires evidence. Certainly, the Roman Catholic Church and other traditions require an abundance of evidence before declaring an artifact to be sacred. To claim that history's great theologians were incapable of reason is absurd. I could go on, but I think the point is clear. Unless someone suggests a way to edit this so that it makes better sense, I will go ahead and delete these sentences.
2419:
2362:
391:
secret heretical beliefs but what exactly makes a true heretic is always open for debate and would be irrelevant to this article anyway. Some have argued
Copernicus was a heretic as well. In any case, Newton was certainly a Christain. Whether he was an orthodox one or not is probably irrelevant to the article as currently constructed.
2374:
1309:. And I checked immediately the reference to find out that indeed he used this phrase, but it was totally taken out of context. Whoever is familiar with Sam Harris knows he is a fierce opponent to Religion. There are multiple sources and can easily be confirmed that he believes that Religion and Science can not be reconciled. Here is
533:
which are examples of religious dogma, only accept conflicting scientific opinion when the evidence becomes overwhelmingly accepted by the general public." I don't see any source for these claims, and they sound patently false. I would expect nearly all religious adherents accept empirical evidence as valid revelation. This is what
2124:
the above quote doesn't tell us anything that it might try to imply, unless there are particular features of particular spiritual beliefs that directly contribute to the shaping and practice of science and technology (or vice versa). That has not been substantiated at all in the article, and it is the very topic of the article.
235:(among other methods) whilst religion can be the empiricism of personal experience. The mediation and spiritual aspects you mention are different and religion is not defined by them. Religion is defined by a set of beliefs. For me then, science and religion are two different subjects and also ones that needn't conflict. --
1356:. So I think we are talking about two different things. And in the Edge article Harris was critiquing Coyne and Dennet for looking at the debate very narrowly and ignoring the broader picture of the debate in that it should not be perplexing that people can hold multiple beliefs without having any real issues.
1307:...Sam Harris (...) argues that it is very easy for people to reconcile science and religion because some things are above strict reason, scientific expertise or domains do not spill over to religious expertise or domains necessarily, and mentions "There simply IS no conflict between religion and science"
1737:
There are a couple consecutive phrases in the lead that are worded to imply that the many scientists who maintain an incompatibility position (even if just on an epistemological basis) also agree to the idea that friction is deeply rooted in religious politics, and permeates history. This is not what
1443:
over in people's minds. How is that? Harris' reply on Edge does relate to the issue of incompatibility of scientific and religious "thinking" which is why he critiques Coyne for example who believes that scientific thinking and religious thinking are different modes of thought, and thus incompatible.
480:
I disagree with some of
Bladesmulti's reply but agree that we should keep the sentence. Having some strong interest and affection for scripture and for scientific knowledge, I can't think of a single fact or method within science that has been borrowed from scripture. However, scientific developments
2123:
Societies (global and historical) are culturally ordered, not religiously ordered. Spiritual belief emerges from and is a key component of human culture. This is fundamental anthropology. Spiritual practice and belief is a feature of all cultures that we know of, contemporary and historical. Stating
2082:
Now, keep in mind that the single line that
Edamone and PaleoNeonate have been discussing, was an unsourced claim. It was just meant to "summarize" what science and religion did, but no source for that was provided - ever. Thinking more about it, it may be better to remove that line altogether since
461:
There are huge arguments, as well as evidences that so much of science has been borrowed from the religious scriptures, that are still some scriptures that tend to be admired by notable scientists, for their compatible presentation with science. When someone with scholarly view target "religion", it
406:
Heretics don't see themselves as advocating false theology, they see themselves as being theologically right and they see the orthodox as having false theology. Of course, this is a later historical development, in the beginnings of
Christianity the proto-orthodox were just a competing faction among
209:
At this point, it seems inaccurate to state that science is based on empiricism any more than religion; both take their evidence directly from first hand experience. The difference is that science is focused on the machinations of the physical universe, while religion is focused on the machinations
118:
The
Hinduism religion traces it's beginnings to the sacred Vedas. Everything that is established in the hindusim faith such as, the gods and goddesses, doctrines, chants, spiritual insights, etc. flow from the poetry of Vedic hymns. The Vedas offer a honor to the sun and moon, water and wind, and to
1402:
disagrees with Jerry Coyne and Daniel
Dennett's views on whether scientific beleifs conflict with religious beliefs at the individual level. Harris argues that it is very easy for people to reconcile science and religion at the individual cognitive level because some things are above strict reason,
2259:
it reads "and 42% believed God existed, 42% disbelieved, and 17% had doubts/did not know; however when the study was replicated 80 years later using American Men and Women of Science in 1996, results were very much the same with 39% believing God exists, 45% disbelieved, and 15% had doubts/did not
2041:
I generally agree and have changed the sentence. However, I unfortunately couldn't verify if the information was an accurate summary of the source immediately. Another problem is that the lead is expected to be a summary of the article, but metaphysical topics are not discussed in the body yet.
1741:
Nowhere in the body can I find a reference that will validate Dawkins et. al's subscription to the "Historical conflict thesis". There's a reason why this very specific thesis and mere "Incompatibility" are different sections, and why you see natural scientists' names in one of them only. In fact,
1632:
A potential problem is that the original ideas were so far off current scientific ones; one must "fit" them into revisionist views to compare them. I also wonder if those sources are reliable. The journal appears to be notable but these may be primary essays? The evolution comparison (not above
1423:
suggest that we are dealing whether religion and the belief in supernatural causation are incompatible to scientific rationalism/empiricism. The subject whether holding these two beliefs at the same time at the individual level is compatible or not, lies in the field of psychology. Splitting the
504:
It describes scientists that were devout christians. This has nothing to do with the topic of article as "Relationship between Science and Religion". Even if it was useful, it then avoids quoting other such devout religious people but great scientists from other religions. May be it really doesn't
2097:
I have gone ahead an deleted the whole unsourced claim. It really did oversimplify science and religion as if they had uniform and timeless natures (which they do not). Plus, throughout the body of the article, what science is and what religion is, is not discussed in much of any detail, probably
1442:
I would be ok with adding that Sam Harris believes that there is incompatibility between religion and science (per the Guardian), however, when it comes an individual's cognitive level, Harris believes that religion and science can be compatible since scientific and religious domains do not spill
390:
I deleted the claim that Isaac Newton was a heretic for two main reasons. First the article as written stated it as almost a fact that he was a heretic, which Newton would presumably disagree with as well as the Church of England which has never declared him a heretic. Some people argue he had
318:
It has been suggested that this be discussed. I would only suggest that, if it is to be included, then it probably needs a section of its own. Early New Age authors, such as H.P. Blavatsky were strongly opposed to materialism...and indeed their spiritualism can be seen somewhat as a philosophical
205:
I'm sure most users will understand that religions have invariably arisen as a result of interpretation of subjective experience - that is, someone feels that they have directly connected to what they see as divine/sacred, and they relay their experience to others, who begin some form of practice
2072:
shows how reason and evidence plays a role in religions too (how else would anyone use reason without relying on some sort of evidence?). For instance the uses of natural theology which incorporated evidences from the natural world to arrive to conclusions that align with the existence of higher
1349:
In re-reading the Edge piece from 2009, the question posed in the article, to which Harris responded, is NOT is are science and religion compatible, it was ""DOES THE EMPIRICAL NATURE OF SCIENCE CONTRADICT THE REVELATORY NATURE OF FAITH?". There is a distinction between 1) Harris' personal views
532:
I am concerned about this claim from the introduction: "These methodologies are totally different. They are diametrically opposed. Reason, empiricism, and evidence simply do not recognize revelation, faith, and sacredness as valid sources of knowledge. Further, revelation, faith, and sacredness,
2324:
Although the article now includes Sikhism and science, it is still not comprehensive since it lacks info about Zoroastrianism and science, and Zoroastrianism is no doubt vital because Judaism is heavily influenced by it, and prior to Arab conquest of Iran most residents there were Zoroastrians.
2431:
2150:
Actually the whole idea of globalization is recent thing since most people in most societies never encountered each other or made a global image of other cultures aside from those within proximity. That societies in the past had traditions which played major roles is a given since they are a
1641:
than to the multiverse hypothesis. The conception also includes the supernatural (atman is like soul)... But this is only my impression. It's possible that a shortened view about many Hindus seeing connections would be adequate (the way the sentence about evolution was formulated appeared
1704:, that was composed sometime between the 9th and the 11th century C.E, "is designed in a manner that suggests relationship between science and religion," are not encyclopedic. They are opinions. You basically seem to be trying to insert a persuasive essay into the middle of the article.
1381:
It should be stated more clearly when we are talking about the conflict between Religion and Science and the conflict at the cognitive level because of Religion and Science. The two subjects are clearly distinct and dealing with them in the same subchapter only yields confusion.
1503:
I reviewed your new section. Unfortunately the parts which are currently in quotes matched when doing searches, so appear to be close paraphrasing or copied from sources. Since they are short they may suit as quotes, but it is better to summarize the sources instead. Thanks,
943:: "IBN AL-HAYXHAM, B. AL-HAYTHAM AL-BASRI, AL-MisRl, was identified towards the end of the 19th century with the ALHAZEN, AVENNATHAN and AVENETAN of mediaeval Latin texts. He is one of the principal Arab mathematicians and, without any doubt, the best physicist."
2174:
The article includes sections on various religions and science. Should Judaism be added? Seems so to me. But the topic is so extensive... There are various websites (and probably numerous books) devoted to the subject. There's even a Knowledge (XXG) category
481:
for many hundreds of years were achieved by societies and mindsets that understood them within the religious intellectual framework of the period. That's not just a "point" for religious people, it's a historical fact that we want to accurately describe. -
592:
I'm considering adding a short section to this article, as I believe Mormonism provides a very relevant and unique perspective on this topic. I would put it in the "Christianity" section, perhaps under under the Roman Catholicism segment. thanks
407:
other factions claiming to represent true Christianity and it was by no means clear that they will win that quarrel. Newton did see trinitarianism as false theology, while the vast majority of Christians in his time were trinitarians.
2067:
displays such discourse with various scholars using evidence to gauge historical accuracy. There are traditions of apologetic in Islam too which make wide usage of evidence to enhance their worldviews. Actually, the article on
206:
based on this revelation. Furthermore, a number of the oldest extant religions (e.g. Buddhism, Hinduism) have at least some of their denominations based firmly on the exploration and categorisation of these "mystical" states.
1331:
You are right about his positions. Even when reading the Edge source's whole section that is not the conclusion that I get, so it indeed appears to be quote mining. I'll take out the claim for now. Thanks for the notice,
1805:
My third point is more of a methodological query rather than a crystallized objection. I've been reading through the original source and it still isn't clear to me whether the term "Jew" is being applied to so-called
92:
I am doing a class assignment and I am unsure of where to put this information that I got from a scholarly article. What I want to add is, Do you have any recommendations of where I should put this information?
1994:"Science acknowledges reason, empiricism, and evidence, while religions include revelation, faith and sacredness whilst also acknowledging metaphysical explanations with regard to the study of the universe."
620:
I would say if you find the time, go for it. Such an addition should be welcome. Just remember, whatever you write should be something that someone has said in a published work, not just your own thoughts
1622:
Balslev, Anindita Niyogi. "Science-Religion Samvad and the Indian Cultural Heritage" Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science. Sep2012, Vol. 47 Issue 3, p589-607. 19p. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01276.x
1576:
Balslev, Anindita Niyogi. "Science-Religion Samvad and the Indian Cultural Heritage" Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science. Sep2012, Vol. 47 Issue 3, p589-607. 19p. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01276.x
1474:
1529:"The similarity between Vedas and Science can be seen in the spirit of inquiry.. The "creation hymn" of the Vedas begins with the question "Kutah ayam visrsti?" Meaning, "Where from this creation?". The
1613:
Gosling, David L."Science and the Hindu Tradition: Compatibility or Conflict?" Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science. Sep2012, Vol. 47 Issue 3, p575-588. 14p. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01275.x.
572:
The 4th paragraph of the introduction seems unusually focused on biological/genetic researchers. Perhaps it would be wise to include more people of different fields of study to add a little contrast.
1754:
2117:
I think deletion is sensible, and I want to acknowledge the change that was made prior to the deletion, since that did remove some of the problem. Can I draw your attention to the line:
72:
67:
59:
1424:
chapter seems very difficult task so I would suggest, either not talk about Sam Harris at all, or state that he thinks that Faith is completely incompatible to scientific rationalism (
2098:
because both are complex social phenomena that do change through time - and that is found throughout the whole article in different cultures, different times, with different people.
433:
Before the Scientific revolution, all societies were organized by religious traditions. It sounds like a "let's be kind with religious people, let's give them a point" sentence.
646:
1042:
2059:
Just chiming in on this since I have to agree with the original wording, not the new one. There are areas of religious studies which include and are based on evidence such as
2232:
There are many aspects of Jainism which have not been covered in the section of Jainism. Please help adding related information to this section. A helpful link would be
430:"Despite these differences, most scientific and technical innovations prior to the Scientific revolution were achieved by societies organized by religious traditions."
1933:
1929:
1915:
2340:
And now the article excludes Sikhism and science, which is impermissible since Sikhism is a major world religion, and Sikhism and science is no doubt Googleable.--
47:
17:
556:
Sorry, I haven't watched this page in a while, and hadn't realized the whole introduction had "gone to hell." Restoring old version we'd worked out previously. -
1792:
1482:
1433:
1387:
1321:
2304:
That's what happens when numbers are rounded. 41.6% + 41.7% + 16.7% = 100%, but if you round the values, they are 42%, 42% and 17%. Nothing bogus here. --
1595:
Raman, Varadaraja V. "Science and a Spiritual Vision: A Hindu Perspective" Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science. Mar2002, Vol. 37 Issue 1, p83. 12p.
1586:
Raman, Varadaraja V. "Science and a Spiritual Vision: A Hindu Perspective" Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science. Mar2002, Vol. 37 Issue 1, p83. 12p.
1567:
Raman, Varadaraja V. "Science and a Spiritual Vision: A Hindu Perspective" Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science. Mar2002, Vol. 37 Issue 1, p83. 12p.
293:
339:
2443:
2394:
2194:
1849:
176:
865:
I see your points. However, you were loading too much specific info into the lead, including too many citations. I've tried to clean this up a bit.
1478:
1429:
1383:
1317:
1359:
The original wording that Ī¤Ī¶ĪµĻĻĪ½Ļ
Ī¼Īæ quoted did reflect Harris' statement quite well. But maybe additional rewording would resolve any confusion?
2120:"Most scientific and technical innovations prior to the scientific revolution were achieved by societies organized by religious traditions."
2073:
powers is one example of how people do not just believe without any evidence. There are reasons for them to believe from their vantage point.
2064:
1288:
1016:
997:
977:
957:
938:
698:
119:
the order in Nature that is universal. This naturalism is the beginning of what further becomes the connection between Hinduism and science.
351:
It looks like the Larson and Witham, 1998 "Leading Scientists Still Reject God" reference for the 7.0% number is incomplete, and broken.
880:
848:
809:
775:
735:
717:
702:
392:
236:
261:
217:
1353:
religious and nonreligious beliefs are content-independent. A newsweek article summarizes the findings of Harris et al. quite nicely
1911:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1425:
1310:
374:
1901:
1891:
609:
449:
1881:
1795:
includes Nobel prizes for peace and literature. I don't understand how that would be relevant for this or any other section.
2218:
2190:
2139:
2023:
1642:
plausible and neutral; instead of claiming connections it reported about contemporary Hindus making those connections). ā
335:
1871:
2477:
2455:
2406:
2349:
2334:
2313:
2297:
2293:
2245:
2222:
2198:
2160:
2143:
2107:
2092:
2054:
2027:
1981:
1976:
1834:
1819:
1722:
1682:
1678:
1654:
1550:
1516:
1486:
1452:
1437:
1414:
1391:
1368:
1344:
1325:
911:
888:
874:
856:
831:
817:
802:
783:
743:
725:
710:
659:
634:
613:
581:
565:
550:
525:
490:
471:
453:
416:
400:
378:
308:
285:
269:
244:
225:
194:
101:
897:"During the Islamic Golden Age foundations for the scientific method were laid by Ibn al-Haytham in his Book of Optics"
521:
1533:
follows suit, attributing to the opening line "Atato Brahm jignasa" or inquiry into the ultimate reality. Even the
870:
827:
798:
38:
1732:
1932:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1190:
1077:
2214:
2186:
254:
I am missing the point of view of Sikhism towards science. (most other world religions are represented here).
1305:
I was astonished to read that Sam Harris, a prominent figure of the new atheist movement, made such comment:"
2473:
1967:
1857:
884:
852:
813:
779:
739:
721:
706:
396:
265:
240:
221:
2281:
2182:
2127:
2011:
1666:
1354:
1351:
597:
509:
437:
362:
323:
257:
213:
2048:
1853:
1648:
1510:
1338:
905:
808:
Ibn al-Haytham was a devout Muslim and second all of his research occurred during the Islamic Golden Age.
2309:
2241:
1951:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1939:
1733:
Lead's mischaracterization of crossover between historical conflict thesis and epistemic incompatibility
1717:
1701:
1534:
1257:
1144:
1036:(2009). "Science in Islam". Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages. ISSN 1703-7603. Retrieved 2014-10-22.
866:
823:
794:
467:
445:
370:
1856:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
2289:
366:
2060:
1634:
1498:
655:
630:
626:
577:
412:
355:
2063:. Historcal research also plays a role in religions like Christianity and Judaism too, for instance
1865:
1827:
1742:
one can even hear Dawkins talk about how the Church used to be the patron of the arts and sciences.
1314:
93:
2378:
2345:
2330:
2156:
2103:
2088:
1638:
1448:
1410:
1399:
1364:
601:
546:
441:
97:
2131:
2036:
2015:
327:
2469:
2451:
2422:
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between
2402:
2365:
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between
2285:
1538:
757:
605:
538:
232:
231:
I think the empiricism of religion and science are two different things. Science can be based on
1936:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1902:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140301051125/http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html
1892:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140301051125/http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html
841:
I constantly sought knowledge and truth, and it became my belief that for gaining access to the
513:
1991:
This sentence is troubling, and I note the sentiment behind it has caused trouble in the past:
1952:
899:
appears to aggrandize the claim, as the current scientific method does not derive from it... ā
2135:
2043:
2019:
1643:
1505:
1333:
900:
761:
561:
486:
331:
281:
134:
1419:
That sounds much better but yet, does not address the problem: The heading of the subchapter
2305:
2237:
1815:
1750:
1705:
1674:
1546:
845:
and closeness to God, there is no better way than that of searching for truth and knowledge.
463:
304:
1959:
622:
1831:
1270:
1157:
651:
573:
517:
408:
191:
162:
150:
2233:
1882:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080705164341/http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/F005SECT3
2466:"God the Geometer" is literally such a perfect pictorial representation of the article.
1905:
1895:
1205:
1092:
2341:
2326:
2210:
2152:
2099:
2084:
1918:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1826:
I would say the whole section is convoluted and anachronistic. Maybe we should look at
1444:
1406:
1360:
770:
765:
672:
665:
542:
1958:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1925:
1872:
https://web.archive.org/web/20100509033003/http://www.itl-usa.org/ahmadi/ahmadi13.html
842:
299:
Would it be possible to include a summary (or at least a link) related to this topic?
2447:
2398:
2382:
1180:
Toomer p.464: "Schramm sums up achievement in the development of scientific method."
1067:
Toomer p.464: "Schramm sums up achievement in the development of scientific method."
1041:
The named reference "Haq" was defined multiple times with different content (see the
1473:
I 'd like to thank all contributors as the Article has been translated (most of it)
2435:
2176:
1807:
1170:
1057:
691:
557:
482:
277:
2001:
pursuing religious understanding. At the very least, "include" should be deleted.
2004:
In addition, no religion "acknowledges" metaphysical explanations. All religions
1885:
1403:
and scientific domains do not spill over to religious domains in people's minds."
2418:
2386:
2361:
2069:
1811:
1746:
1670:
1542:
1530:
1033:
687:
300:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
822:
That, on its own, is thin. How did religion affect his science? Or vice versa?
1924:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1191:"International Year of Light - Ibn Al-Haytham and the Legacy of Arabic Optics"
1078:"International Year of Light - Ibn Al-Haytham and the Legacy of Arabic Optics"
716:
Seems like nobody is interested in discussion so I will make my changes soon.
683:
180:
2325:
Besides, it once spread to China and nowadays some Indians are Zorastrians.--
2213:
in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy as a model for this article here?
1696:
This needs major work. Comments like "the undeniable similarity between the
1174:
1061:
1875:
1526:
I would like to add the following information under the topic "Hinduism"
694:
1239:
Journal of the International Society for the History of Islamic Medicine
1232:"Al-Haytham the man of experience. First steps in the science of vision"
1126:
Journal of the International Society for the History of Islamic Medicine
1119:"Al-Haytham the man of experience. First steps in the science of vision"
625:). (And you should cite that published work using the "Cite" feature).
1697:
1231:
1118:
534:
354:
Some combination of Nature 394, 313 (23 July 1998) doi:10.1038/28478
679:
356:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v394/n6691/full/394313a0.html
1866:
http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/publications/jjrs/pdf/477.pdf
1828:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/religion-science/#ReliBeliAcad
1175:
Review on JSTOR, Toomer's 1964 review of Matthias Schramm (1963)
1062:
Review on JSTOR, Toomer's 1964 review of Matthias Schramm (1963)
676:
462:
is meant for all major religions, not just one or two or three.
1810:
like Steven Weinberg and Richard Feynman, who were atheists. --
1633:
but was in the recent edit) for instance appears closer to the
25:
697:āhence understanding the scientific method 200 years before
129:
Raman, Varadaraja. "Hinduism and science: some reflections".
1860:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1700:
and Science, lies in the spirit of inquiry" and "Even the
2234:
http://www.yugpradhan.com/en/book/science-and-religion
588:
section on Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
276:
Maybe you could do some research and get back to us! -
2413:
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
2356:
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
2177:
https://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Judaism_and_science
1906:
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html
1896:
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html
793:
What does this have to do with religion AND science?
1928:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1637:than to biology. The many worlds appear more like
498:The Introduction is inconsistent in it's citings.
177:Relationship_between_religion_and_science#Hinduism
1396:Rewording would clarify the issue no? How about,
671:I like to add this line to the second paragraph:
1492:āRelationship during middle ages and renaissance
976:harvnb error: no target: CITEREFTopdemir2007b (
839:
682:, was an early proponent of the concept that a
1914:This message was posted before February 2018.
1886:http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/F005SECT3
1015:harvnb error: no target: CITEREFAckerman1991 (
18:Talk:Relationship between religion and science
756:This line might be better suited: During the
8:
1745:Maybe it's time to tear the strawman down.--
1604:Shrimad Bhaagvatam, Daivanetren. a: 3, 31, 1
996:harvnb error: no target: CITEREFRashed2007 (
956:harvnb error: no target: CITEREFSardar1998 (
937:harvnb error: no target: CITEREFVernet1996 (
313:
1987:Evidence for science; evidence for religion
1301:Sam Harris on Religion and Science Conflict
1287:harvnb error: no target: CITEREFPlott2000 (
292:This article contains no information about
2279:
2228:Missing information on Jainism and Science
2180:
2125:
2009:
1664:
314:The article's brief mention of the New Age
294:scientific studies of religious experience
2444:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment
2395:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment
1850:Relationship between religion and science
1848:I have just modified 5 external links on
971:
1011:
647:The Harmony between Religion and Science
175:Modify and expand the last paragraph of
2442:Above undated message substituted from
2393:Above undated message substituted from
1876:http://itl-usa.org/ahmadi/ahmadi13.html
1764:
1738:the rest of the article says, however.
1560:
925:
111:
1266:
1255:
1153:
1142:
991:
952:
932:
896:
836:Ibn al-Haytham described his theology:
158:
146:
142:
132:
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
2065:Historical reliability of the Gospels
1798:Second, a better analysis would take
1283:
1029:
1027:
427:The following sentence is pointless.
7:
2462:Props to the designer of the article
1037:
690:based on confirmable procedures or
2427:
2423:
2370:
2366:
1204:Al-Khalili, Jim (4 January 2009).
1091:Al-Khalili, Jim (4 January 2009).
24:
1852:. Please take a moment to review
2430:. Further details are available
2417:
2373:. Further details are available
2360:
1230:Gorini, Rosanna (October 2003).
1117:Gorini, Rosanna (October 2003).
29:
1864:Corrected formatting/usage for
1793:Studies on scientists' beliefs
1707:
1177:Ibn Al-Haythams Weg Zur Physik
1064:Ibn Al-Haythams Weg Zur Physik
1:
2314:11:08, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
2246:10:21, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
1835:01:09, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
1820:00:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
1755:20:49, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
1723:19:49, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
1683:19:21, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
1655:03:00, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
1551:00:54, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
912:11:59, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
660:16:30, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
644:I suggest to added the image
582:20:55, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
226:01:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
2478:22:41, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
2456:07:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
2407:07:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
2350:17:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
2161:03:54, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
2144:13:22, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
2108:23:39, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
2093:20:04, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
2055:14:22, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
2028:12:43, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
2008:metaphysical explanations.
1982:00:43, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
1791:The illustration on section
1517:03:46, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
1487:08:02, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
1453:12:18, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
1438:06:15, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
1415:05:36, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
1392:05:03, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
1369:21:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
1345:18:23, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
1326:17:16, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
1206:"The 'first true scientist'"
1093:"The 'first true scientist'"
879:Thank you for the clean up.
491:07:17, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
472:16:13, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
454:16:08, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
309:02:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
195:20:04, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
102:19:06, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
2276:15% had doubts/did not know
2267:17% had doubts/did not know
1398:"Neuroscientist and author
635:06:28, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
526:17:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
423:Improvement of introduction
2493:
2223:12:39, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
2199:10:17, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
1945:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1845:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
614:16:15, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
417:01:37, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
245:01:10, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
2298:16:42, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
1800:conditional distributions
1772:Dawkins, Richard (2016).
889:08:08, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
875:14:08, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
857:03:12, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
832:03:01, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
818:02:47, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
803:02:40, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
784:02:39, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
744:02:16, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
726:01:30, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
711:03:05, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
379:16:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
340:16:07, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
2335:09:19, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
2320:Not comprehensive enough
2272:39% believing God exists
2263:42% believed God existed
566:15:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
551:13:37, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
401:19:58, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
286:19:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
270:16:58, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
1841:External links modified
347:Reference to be updated
201:Empiricism and Religion
847:
699:Renaissance scientists
2434:. Student editor(s):
2377:. Student editor(s):
2278:This adds up to 99%
2269:This adds up to 101%
2006:require and propagate
1776:. Black Swan. p.Ā 111.
42:of past discussions.
2257:Surveys of Attitudes
2061:Biblical archaeology
1926:regular verification
1635:great chain of being
760:foundations for the
2215:BillyGoatsGruff2020
2187:BillyGoatsGruff2020
2170:Judaism and Science
2153:Huitzilopochtli1990
2100:Huitzilopochtli1990
2085:Huitzilopochtli1990
1916:After February 2018
1830:for inspiration. --
1639:plane (esotericism)
1445:Huitzilopochtli1990
1407:Huitzilopochtli1990
1361:Huitzilopochtli1990
2432:on the course page
2375:on the course page
1970:InternetArchiveBot
1921:InternetArchiveBot
1715:
1702:Shrimad Bhaagvatam
1535:Shrimad Bhaagvatam
758:Islamic Golden Age
686:must be proved by
539:general revelation
233:empirical research
2300:
2284:comment added by
2201:
2185:comment added by
2146:
2130:comment added by
2030:
2014:comment added by
1946:
1706:
1685:
1669:comment added by
1426:2011, theGuardian
762:scientific method
617:
600:comment added by
529:
512:comment added by
457:
440:comment added by
386:Newton as heretic
382:
365:comment added by
343:
326:comment added by
260:comment added by
216:comment added by
157:Missing or empty
85:
84:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
2484:
2458:
2429:
2428:13 December 2021
2425:
2421:
2409:
2372:
2368:
2364:
2251:Bogus Statistics
2209:What if we used
2051:
2046:
2040:
1980:
1971:
1944:
1943:
1922:
1786:Misleading chart
1778:
1777:
1774:The God Delusion
1769:
1720:
1714:
1713:
1710:
1651:
1646:
1624:
1620:
1614:
1611:
1605:
1602:
1596:
1593:
1587:
1584:
1578:
1574:
1568:
1565:
1513:
1508:
1502:
1405:Would that work?
1341:
1336:
1294:
1293:, Pt. II, p. 465
1292:
1281:
1275:
1274:
1268:
1263:
1261:
1253:
1251:
1250:
1236:
1227:
1221:
1220:
1218:
1216:
1201:
1195:
1194:
1187:
1181:
1168:
1162:
1161:
1155:
1150:
1148:
1140:
1138:
1137:
1123:
1114:
1108:
1107:
1105:
1103:
1088:
1082:
1081:
1074:
1068:
1055:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1031:
1022:
1020:
1009:
1003:
1001:
989:
983:
981:
969:
963:
961:
950:
944:
942:
930:
908:
903:
867:Isambard Kingdom
824:Isambard Kingdom
795:Isambard Kingdom
616:
594:
528:
506:
456:
434:
381:
359:
342:
320:
272:
228:
187:
186:
167:
166:
160:
154:
148:
144:
140:
138:
130:
126:
120:
116:
81:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
2492:
2491:
2487:
2486:
2485:
2483:
2482:
2481:
2464:
2441:
2415:
2392:
2358:
2322:
2274:45% disbelieved
2265:42% disbelieved
2253:
2230:
2207:
2172:
2049:
2044:
2034:
1989:
1974:
1969:
1937:
1930:have permission
1920:
1858:this simple FaQ
1843:
1788:
1783:
1782:
1781:
1771:
1770:
1766:
1735:
1718:
1711:
1708:
1649:
1644:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1621:
1617:
1612:
1608:
1603:
1599:
1594:
1590:
1585:
1581:
1575:
1571:
1566:
1562:
1524:
1511:
1506:
1496:
1494:
1471:
1421:incompatibility
1339:
1334:
1303:
1298:
1297:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1264:
1254:
1248:
1246:
1234:
1229:
1228:
1224:
1214:
1212:
1203:
1202:
1198:
1189:
1188:
1184:
1169:
1165:
1151:
1141:
1135:
1133:
1121:
1116:
1115:
1111:
1101:
1099:
1090:
1089:
1085:
1076:
1075:
1071:
1056:
1052:
1040:
1038:
1032:
1025:
1014:
1010:
1006:
995:
990:
986:
975:
970:
966:
955:
951:
947:
936:
931:
927:
919:
906:
901:
669:
642:
595:
590:
537:referred to as
507:
435:
425:
388:
360:
349:
321:
316:
297:
255:
252:
211:
203:
184:
182:
172:
171:
170:
156:
141:
131:
128:
127:
123:
117:
113:
90:
77:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2490:
2488:
2463:
2460:
2424:30 August 2021
2414:
2411:
2379:Redheadscholar
2371:31 August 2020
2357:
2354:
2353:
2352:
2321:
2318:
2317:
2316:
2277:
2275:
2273:
2268:
2266:
2264:
2252:
2249:
2229:
2226:
2206:
2203:
2171:
2168:
2166:
2164:
2163:
2115:
2114:
2113:
2112:
2111:
2110:
2077:
2076:
2075:
2074:
1988:
1985:
1964:
1963:
1956:
1909:
1908:
1900:Added archive
1898:
1890:Added archive
1888:
1880:Added archive
1878:
1870:Added archive
1868:
1842:
1839:
1838:
1837:
1823:
1822:
1803:
1796:
1787:
1784:
1780:
1779:
1763:
1762:
1758:
1734:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1727:
1726:
1725:
1689:
1688:
1687:
1686:
1658:
1657:
1626:
1625:
1615:
1606:
1597:
1588:
1579:
1569:
1559:
1558:
1554:
1523:
1520:
1493:
1490:
1470:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1371:
1357:
1302:
1299:
1296:
1295:
1276:
1222:
1196:
1182:
1163:
1109:
1083:
1069:
1050:
1023:
1004:
984:
972:Topdemir 2007b
964:
945:
924:
920:
918:
915:
894:
893:
892:
891:
863:
862:
861:
860:
859:
837:
791:
790:
789:
788:
787:
786:
771:Book of Optics
766:Ibn al-Haytham
749:
748:
747:
746:
729:
728:
673:Ibn al-Haytham
668:
666:Ibn al-Haytham
663:
641:
638:
589:
586:
585:
584:
569:
568:
496:
495:
494:
493:
475:
474:
424:
421:
420:
419:
387:
384:
348:
345:
315:
312:
296:
290:
289:
288:
251:
248:
202:
199:
198:
197:
169:
168:
121:
110:
109:
105:
89:
86:
83:
82:
75:
70:
65:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2489:
2480:
2479:
2475:
2471:
2470:SpicyMemes123
2467:
2461:
2459:
2457:
2453:
2449:
2445:
2439:
2437:
2433:
2420:
2412:
2410:
2408:
2404:
2400:
2396:
2390:
2388:
2384:
2380:
2376:
2363:
2355:
2351:
2347:
2343:
2339:
2338:
2337:
2336:
2332:
2328:
2319:
2315:
2311:
2307:
2303:
2302:
2301:
2299:
2295:
2291:
2287:
2283:
2270:
2261:
2258:
2250:
2248:
2247:
2243:
2239:
2235:
2227:
2225:
2224:
2220:
2216:
2212:
2205:Model article
2204:
2202:
2200:
2196:
2192:
2188:
2184:
2178:
2169:
2167:
2162:
2158:
2154:
2149:
2148:
2147:
2145:
2141:
2137:
2133:
2129:
2121:
2118:
2109:
2105:
2101:
2096:
2095:
2094:
2090:
2086:
2081:
2080:
2079:
2078:
2071:
2066:
2062:
2058:
2057:
2056:
2052:
2047:
2038:
2033:
2032:
2031:
2029:
2025:
2021:
2017:
2013:
2007:
2002:
2000:
1995:
1992:
1986:
1984:
1983:
1978:
1973:
1972:
1961:
1957:
1954:
1950:
1949:
1948:
1941:
1935:
1931:
1927:
1923:
1917:
1912:
1907:
1903:
1899:
1897:
1893:
1889:
1887:
1883:
1879:
1877:
1873:
1869:
1867:
1863:
1862:
1861:
1859:
1855:
1851:
1846:
1840:
1836:
1833:
1829:
1825:
1824:
1821:
1817:
1813:
1809:
1808:cultural Jews
1804:
1801:
1797:
1794:
1790:
1789:
1785:
1775:
1768:
1765:
1761:
1757:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1743:
1739:
1724:
1721:
1716:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1694:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1690:
1684:
1680:
1676:
1672:
1668:
1662:
1661:
1660:
1659:
1656:
1652:
1647:
1640:
1636:
1631:
1630:
1619:
1616:
1610:
1607:
1601:
1598:
1592:
1589:
1583:
1580:
1573:
1570:
1564:
1561:
1557:
1553:
1552:
1548:
1544:
1540:
1536:
1532:
1527:
1521:
1519:
1518:
1514:
1509:
1500:
1491:
1489:
1488:
1484:
1480:
1476:
1469:Thank you all
1468:
1454:
1450:
1446:
1441:
1440:
1439:
1435:
1431:
1427:
1422:
1418:
1417:
1416:
1412:
1408:
1404:
1401:
1395:
1394:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1358:
1355:
1352:
1348:
1347:
1346:
1342:
1337:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1316:
1312:
1308:
1300:
1290:
1285:
1280:
1277:
1272:
1259:
1244:
1240:
1233:
1226:
1223:
1211:
1207:
1200:
1197:
1192:
1186:
1183:
1179:
1178:
1172:
1167:
1164:
1159:
1146:
1131:
1127:
1120:
1113:
1110:
1098:
1094:
1087:
1084:
1079:
1073:
1070:
1066:
1065:
1059:
1054:
1051:
1044:
1035:
1030:
1028:
1024:
1018:
1013:
1012:Ackerman 1991
1008:
1005:
999:
993:
988:
985:
979:
973:
968:
965:
959:
954:
949:
946:
940:
934:
929:
926:
923:
916:
914:
913:
909:
904:
898:
890:
886:
882:
881:45.116.232.20
878:
877:
876:
872:
868:
864:
858:
854:
850:
849:45.116.232.22
846:
844:
838:
835:
834:
833:
829:
825:
821:
820:
819:
815:
811:
810:45.116.232.22
807:
806:
805:
804:
800:
796:
785:
781:
777:
776:45.116.232.22
773:
772:
767:
764:were laid by
763:
759:
755:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
745:
741:
737:
736:45.116.232.22
733:
732:
731:
730:
727:
723:
719:
718:45.116.233.43
715:
714:
713:
712:
708:
704:
703:45.116.232.61
700:
696:
693:
689:
685:
681:
678:
674:
667:
664:
662:
661:
657:
653:
649:
648:
639:
637:
636:
632:
628:
624:
618:
615:
611:
607:
603:
599:
587:
583:
579:
575:
571:
570:
567:
563:
559:
555:
554:
553:
552:
548:
544:
540:
536:
530:
527:
523:
519:
515:
511:
502:
499:
492:
488:
484:
479:
478:
477:
476:
473:
469:
465:
460:
459:
458:
455:
451:
447:
443:
439:
431:
428:
422:
418:
414:
410:
405:
404:
403:
402:
398:
394:
393:67.176.51.111
385:
383:
380:
376:
372:
368:
364:
358:might work.
357:
352:
346:
344:
341:
337:
333:
329:
325:
311:
310:
306:
302:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
274:
273:
271:
267:
263:
259:
249:
247:
246:
242:
238:
237:86.21.101.169
234:
229:
227:
223:
219:
215:
207:
200:
196:
193:
192:
189:
188:
178:
174:
173:
164:
152:
143:|access-date=
136:
125:
122:
115:
112:
108:
104:
103:
99:
95:
87:
80:
76:
74:
71:
69:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
2468:
2465:
2440:
2416:
2391:
2367:27 July 2020
2359:
2323:
2280:āĀ Preceding
2271:
2262:
2256:
2254:
2231:
2211:this article
2208:
2181:āĀ Preceding
2173:
2165:
2126:āĀ Preceding
2122:
2119:
2116:
2010:āĀ Preceding
2005:
2003:
1998:
1996:
1993:
1990:
1968:
1965:
1940:source check
1919:
1913:
1910:
1847:
1844:
1799:
1773:
1767:
1759:
1744:
1740:
1736:
1665:āĀ Preceding
1618:
1609:
1600:
1591:
1582:
1572:
1563:
1555:
1528:
1525:
1495:
1472:
1420:
1397:
1306:
1304:
1279:
1258:cite journal
1247:. Retrieved
1242:
1238:
1225:
1215:24 September
1213:. Retrieved
1209:
1199:
1185:
1176:
1171:G. J. Toomer
1166:
1145:cite journal
1134:. Retrieved
1129:
1125:
1112:
1102:24 September
1100:. Retrieved
1096:
1086:
1072:
1063:
1058:G. J. Toomer
1053:
1039:Cite error:
1007:
987:
967:
948:
928:
921:
895:
840:
792:
769:
692:mathematical
670:
645:
643:
619:
596:āĀ Preceding
591:
531:
508:āĀ Preceding
503:
500:
497:
436:āĀ Preceding
432:
429:
426:
389:
361:āĀ Preceding
353:
350:
322:āĀ Preceding
317:
298:
262:86.93.62.219
256:ā Preceding
253:
230:
218:2.217.127.78
212:ā Preceding
208:
204:
190:
181:
124:
114:
106:
91:
78:
43:
37:
2306:Hob Gadling
2238:Rishabh.rsd
2070:apologetics
1539:Upanishadas
1531:Brahmasutra
1315:another one
992:Rashed 2007
953:Sardar 1998
933:Vernet 1996
688:experiments
464:Bladesmulti
367:Adam.gibson
36:This is an
1999:as well as
1977:Report bug
1832:isacdaavid
1760:References
1556:References
1499:Mannat2099
1400:Sam Harris
1284:Plott 2000
1249:2008-09-25
1245:(4): 53ā55
1136:2008-09-25
1132:(4): 53ā55
922:References
917:References
843:effulgence
684:hypothesis
652:Spinoziano
627:Dabreese00
574:Mousenight
409:Tgeorgescu
107:References
2342:RekishiEJ
2327:RekishiEJ
2042:Thanks, ā
1960:this tool
1953:this tool
1479:Ī¤Ī¶ĪµĻĻĪ½Ļ
Ī¼Īæ
1430:Ī¤Ī¶ĪµĻĻĪ½Ļ
Ī¼Īæ
1384:Ī¤Ī¶ĪµĻĻĪ½Ļ
Ī¼Īæ
1318:Ī¤Ī¶ĪµĻĻĪ½Ļ
Ī¼Īæ
1267:|ref=harv
1154:|ref=harv
1043:help page
1034:Haq, Syed
974:, pp.Ā 8ā9
543:BeeArkKey
145:requires
94:Britt2244
79:ArchiveĀ 5
73:ArchiveĀ 4
68:ArchiveĀ 3
60:ArchiveĀ 1
2448:PrimeBOT
2399:PrimeBOT
2383:Ucsc Ava
2294:contribs
2282:unsigned
2195:contribs
2183:unsigned
2140:contribs
2128:unsigned
2024:contribs
2012:unsigned
1966:Cheers.ā
1679:contribs
1667:unsigned
1522:Hinduism
1475:to greek
1265:Invalid
1210:BBC News
1152:Invalid
1097:BBC News
935:, p.Ā 788
734:Posted.
695:evidence
610:contribs
602:Drewbigs
598:unsigned
522:contribs
510:unsigned
450:contribs
442:JeanPeup
438:unsigned
375:contribs
363:unsigned
336:contribs
324:unsigned
258:unsigned
250:Question
214:unsigned
135:cite web
88:Question
2436:Kvtokar
2260:know."
2132:Edamone
2050:Neonate
2037:Edamone
2016:Edamone
1854:my edit
1698:Vedanta
1650:Neonate
1512:Neonate
1340:Neonate
994:, p.Ā 11
907:Neonate
768:in his
558:Darouet
535:Aquinas
483:Darouet
328:Cjmonks
278:Darouet
39:archive
2387:Typo93
2286:Bsimm2
2255:Under
1812:Sisgeo
1747:Sisgeo
1719:(talk)
1709:Pepper
1671:Vkhat1
1543:Vkhat1
680:Muslim
623:WP:NOR
301:Jarble
2045:Paleo
1712:Beast
1645:Paleo
1507:Paleo
1335:Paleo
1235:(PDF)
1122:(PDF)
902:Paleo
640:Image
514:Prlal
159:|url=
147:|url=
16:<
2474:talk
2452:talk
2426:and
2403:talk
2369:and
2346:talk
2331:talk
2310:talk
2290:talk
2242:talk
2219:talk
2191:talk
2157:talk
2136:talk
2104:talk
2089:talk
2020:talk
1816:talk
1751:talk
1675:talk
1547:talk
1483:talk
1449:talk
1434:talk
1411:talk
1388:talk
1365:talk
1322:talk
1289:help
1271:help
1217:2013
1158:help
1104:2013
1017:help
998:help
978:help
958:help
939:help
885:talk
871:talk
853:talk
828:talk
814:talk
799:talk
780:talk
740:talk
722:talk
707:talk
677:Arab
675:, a
656:talk
650:. --
631:talk
606:talk
578:talk
562:talk
547:talk
518:talk
487:talk
468:talk
446:talk
413:talk
397:talk
371:talk
332:talk
305:talk
282:talk
266:talk
241:talk
222:talk
183:Neil
179:? --
163:help
151:help
98:talk
2446:by
2397:by
2179:.
1934:RfC
1904:to
1894:to
1884:to
1874:to
1313:ps-
1311:one
2476:)
2454:)
2438:.
2405:)
2389:.
2385:,
2381:,
2348:)
2333:)
2312:)
2296:)
2292:ā¢
2244:)
2236:.
2221:)
2197:)
2193:ā¢
2159:)
2142:)
2138:ā¢
2106:)
2091:)
2053:ā
2026:)
2022:ā¢
1947:.
1942:}}
1938:{{
1818:)
1753:)
1681:)
1677:ā¢
1653:ā
1549:)
1515:ā
1485:)
1477:.
1451:)
1436:)
1428:)
1413:)
1390:)
1367:)
1343:ā
1324:)
1262::
1260:}}
1256:{{
1241:.
1237:.
1208:.
1173:.
1149::
1147:}}
1143:{{
1128:.
1124:.
1095:.
1060:.
1045:).
1026:^
910:ā
887:)
873:)
855:)
830:)
816:)
801:)
782:)
774:.
742:)
724:)
709:)
701:.
658:)
633:)
612:)
608:ā¢
580:)
564:)
549:)
524:)
520:ā¢
489:)
470:)
452:)
448:ā¢
415:)
399:)
377:)
373:ā¢
338:)
334:ā¢
307:)
284:)
268:)
243:)
224:)
155:;
139::
137:}}
133:{{
100:)
64:ā
2472:(
2450:(
2401:(
2344:(
2329:(
2308:(
2288:(
2240:(
2217:(
2189:(
2155:(
2134:(
2102:(
2087:(
2039::
2035:@
2018:(
1979:)
1975:(
1962:.
1955:.
1814:(
1749:(
1673:(
1545:(
1504:ā
1501::
1497:@
1481:(
1447:(
1432:(
1409:(
1386:(
1363:(
1332:ā
1320:(
1291:)
1273:)
1269:(
1252:.
1243:2
1219:.
1193:.
1160:)
1156:(
1139:.
1130:2
1106:.
1080:.
1021:.
1019:)
1002:.
1000:)
982:.
980:)
962:.
960:)
941:)
883:(
869:(
851:(
826:(
812:(
797:(
778:(
738:(
720:(
705:(
654:(
629:(
621:(
604:(
576:(
560:(
545:(
516:(
485:(
466:(
444:(
411:(
395:(
369:(
330:(
303:(
280:(
264:(
239:(
220:(
185:N
165:)
161:(
153:)
149:(
96:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.