Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A scientist can be a believer in religious tenets — Carmelics
    Home/Religious Experience
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A scientist can be a believer in religious tenets

    Religious ExperienceTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The First Cause may have inexplicable effects
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.One may believe that effects claimed by faith are real even if inexplicable and in conflict with science
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Religious tenets having no place in the sciences does not preclude a scientist from holding religious beliefs
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.W.K. Clifford's evidentialist principle holds that it is morally wrong to believe anything on insufficient evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Scientific methodology requires proportioning belief to empirical evidence, making faith-based commitments epistemically impermissible for the scientist qua scientist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A role that structurally prohibits certain belief-forming methods cannot be coherently combined with commitments formed exclusively by those prohibited methods.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Boethius of Dacia's double-truth framework assigns religious and scientific claims to incommensurable domains of rational assessment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If religious tenets genuinely conflict with scientific conclusions, the scientist who affirms both simultaneously violates the law of non-contradiction rather than compartmentalizing legitimately.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Compartmentalization of contradictory beliefs constitutes motivated irrationality, not genuine dual commitment, as Freud and later Festinger's cognitive dissonance research establish.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Religious ExperienceTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    2 topics

    Causation1 linkedNatural Theology1 linked

    Related

    A role that structurally prohibits certain belief-forming methods cannot be cohe...Boethius of Dacia's double-truth framework assigns religious and scientific clai...Compartmentalization of contradictory beliefs constitutes motivated irrationalit...If religious tenets genuinely conflict with scientific conclusions, the scientis...
    +5 moreShow less
    One may believe that effects claimed by faith are real even if inexplicable and ...Religious tenets having no place in the sciences does not preclude a scientist f...Scientific methodology requires proportioning belief to empirical evidence, maki...

    Similar

    Religious tenets having no place in the sciences does not preclude a s...88%To the believing scientist, truths of faith are truths unconditionally82%Truths of faith and scientific truths are epistemologically distinct f...81%A scientist can treat a theory as an adequate basis for research witho...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: boethius-dacia
    View source passageHide passage
    The fact that certain religious tenets have no place in the sciences does not, however, mean that a scientist cannot be a believer. The analysis of the causal system showed that the First Cause may have inexplicable effects, and one may believe that any such effects claimed by faith are real, for all their being inexplicable and in conflict with science. The information about them that revelation provides must be accepted as brute facts. To the believing scientist the truths of faith are truths
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    The First Cause may have inexplicable effects
    W.K. Clifford's evidentialist principle holds that it is morally wrong to believ...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit