Page 2 - Science And Religion - Intellectual Honesty & The Origins Debate Science Theory Religion - An Examination Continued



 To ~ Online Article - Page 2

    ©See Bottom of Page


    Science and Religion   

The Origins Debate





Is Science The Only Way For Man To Understand His World?



     Historical Perspectives: Science is but one way Man examines his world.

    Science works within a practical application of the methodology (a system of methods) within specific fields of science and is able to function reliably only in the present world.


     Yet, mankind has been given access to a wider view of his history and his world.


   The Silence of Science : Science, when it is acting within its authority and science theory, is able to explore scientifically, this present world.  The two primary ideas regarding ORIGINS, being examined, do not meet the requirements (within science) for theory.


    The fundamental structure of science provides no platform to support an origins  idea, speculation or perspective regarding the beginnings of the world.


     No origins idea is able to fulfill the requirements for a science theory  (within a rational or practical consistency).






What Is Theory Within The Construct of Science?


     THEORY (within science) - Implies considerable evidence in support of a formulated general principle explaining the operation of certain phenomena



Phenomena (plural of phenomenon)

     A phenomenon is defined as any fact, circumstance, or experience that is   apparent  to the senses and that can be scientifically described or appraised.


     When thinking of, speaking about or seeking information regarding origins, the search is framed within the reality that no origins phenomena can be scientifically described or appraised (it is not available to scientific observation).


WHY?

     Because Creation -- the beginnings of all things -- is a UNIQUE EVENT (it is a done deal) in time and space.


     Modern scientific investigation begins within an essentially completed (but degenerating) product, so to speak.


     The beginning "phenomena" that activated all things --- that caused the result of all things --- can no longer be scientifically observed, examined or described using the methodology of science.


     When being rationally consistent within definition, it isn't good enough in scientific research to claim that a thing, a process, a result, observed TODAY can stand in the place (and fill the scientific requirements of observation and experimentation) of what took place at the beginning of all things.


      It is not merely a matter of exploratory retrogression of the processes within known phenomena that would allow modern scientific Man to meet God or be shocked by the loudness of the Big Bang (this idea fails on the same basis that the imagined idea, of, "The present is the Key to the past," fails.  There is no scientific capability to reach into an inaccessible past)!


     The inalterable reality is that no origins concept is able to fill the definition for scientific theory.


     This factual reality (and history) about -- WHAT SCIENCE IS -- explains why scientists have been most effective in chemistry laboratories, medical research, nuclear physics, engineering endeavors, space flight, on and on.

     Science - real science - is a system that works and functions within a definable jurisdiction.

     Science works in and through a limited and dependent arena of objective (unbiased as possible) investigative practices.



"What is wrong with theory in science?"


Good question!
There is nothing wrong with theory within science.

The Problem:

     There is no rational or ethical justification for an idea, elicited outside of scientific methodology and jurisdiction to be accepted as theory within science ~~ a science theory must be able to explain the operation of phenomena. There are no origins phenomena that is accessible by the methods within science today ~~ and because of this inherent limitation of the science method, no origins idea can be classified (consistently or rationally) a science theory.



Isn't intellectual honesty a fundamental requirement for all scientific endeavor.



     Shouldn't all theory accepted within science be required to meet the scientific definition for theory (consistently, any such concept, outside of the scientific definition for theory, should reasonably be viewed as outside the authority and jurisdiction of science)?


     Theory within science "... implies considerable evidence in support of a formulated general principle explaining the operation of certain phenomena."


     The function of theory within science allows ideas to be tested and re-tested based upon the operation of observable phenomena.


     An ultimately incorrect concept is able to be rejected because the idea is being examined within its specific field of science.

     Theoretical science, tests  ideas, concepts and facts within the respective known scientific laws within a particular field of science.





THE JURISDICTION OF SCIENCE IS LIMITED



The study of origins (beginning of the universe) are outside the authority, methodology, jurisdiction, or theoretical exploration required within science.


     The Methodology (system of methods) within Science Is A Limited Exploratory Tool Appropriate to Today's World.


A Theorem
An Origins Perspective Can Be True and Still Not Be a Science Theory -


CONSISTENTLY, EXPECTATIONS WITHIN SCIENCE
CAN BE SEEN AS DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL TO ABILITY TO EXAMINE


Rational and Irrational Expectations

     The evolutionary scientist, who doesn't find a message, "I programmed this code"  left by God --- installed between every few strands of complex information within DNA - appropriates authority and scientific jurisdiction (that he/she doesn't have) when he/she declares there is no scientific evidence God exists.




"A bit more complex...
in their view...don't you think?"




     
~ Yes, She Is Right... Evolutionists would surely insist that it is more complex. Yet, underneath the complexity of science research is the fundamental FALSE  idea that Scientists have the AUTHORITY within science to speak regarding Origins




SCIENCE IN THE DOCK

A FALSE PREMISE


    APPROPRIATION OF JURISDICTION - Assuming jurisdiction when there is no methodology within science that supports the assumption being made.


      Logically, the appropriation of jurisdiction without the power (the ability to use scientific methodology) to prove reliability for a conclusion, brings into question the authority by which a scientist is attempting to speak.


     The attempt by evolutionary scientists to describe origins, founded on the idea of an inherent creative, (not directed by Intelligence) organizing mechanism at the beginning of the universe, is not a general principle which can explain the operation of certain phenomena at the beginnings of all things.


     Theory within science "... implies considerable evidence in support of a formulated general principle explaining the operation of certain phenomena."


      The IDEA of evolution is an idea. It is not a "general principle" that is based on "considerable evidence" which explains the operation of certain phenomena during the origins of the universe.

      When there is an inability for scientists to observe or measure the "operation of certain phenomena" that took place during the origins of the universe, the evolutionary "general principle" can't be that which "explains" what has never been observed or examined by scientific methods.


      The Ethical Obligation To Students (and to the wider culture) by Educational Institutions and The Science Community


     The evolution idea regarding Origins (along with all ideas about beginnings) remains outside of science theory.


      Each Student Has A Moral Right (and Consumer Right) To Expect Intellectual Honesty From Every Educational Institution the Student Attends (and From Its Teachers)

      The idea of evolution (and Intelligent Design ideas) could be consistently studied (within educational institutions) by creating a new category, such as, Ideas About Origins within philosophy or within the historical assertions regarding origins within religion or explored within social studies; Intellectual Honesty requires that it no longer remain within science studies as Science Theory.



~ INTELLIGENT DESIGN ~


      Within the same framework of examination, the scientists who insist the DNA library, for example, speaks of an intelligent Designer, as the Author of the DNA source code, has not  proven God  the cause behind the information, scientifically.


     Making a rational and consistent connection between the expression of intelligence within the world, by itself, as presenting evidence of God, is a reasonable idea, but God has not been found or examined , through the methodology of scientific investigation.


    And while those scientists who hold to Intelligent Design as the organizing First Cause behind Origins, often use the term, "creation model" (when presenting their creation viewpoint), the willingness to argue within science theory appears to have brought a "supportive" authenticity to the evolution idea where there is no authenticity (when reasoning consistently) to the evolution idea as science theory.


    Any rational concept of God places Him outside Time and Space.  Within a consistent and rational analysis, a person can understand, that if God exists, He must reach for Man.   Man has no ability to find Him or examine Him through such a limited method of examining Man's world, as through the methods and tools within science or science theory.




SUMMARY

(the implications to the rationally consistent examination of the Origins debate)


    
1. The ORIGINS DEBATE does not have scientific authority.


    
2. The ORIGINS DEBATE cannot be placed within scientific methodology.


    
3. The ORIGINS DEBATE cannot be placed within the jurisdiction of science.



     Both origins concepts (under examination),  fail as a scientific THEORY -- A scientific theory must be able to function within the structure of science.




To Continue
Go To Page 3
The Authority And Jurisdiction
of Science ~

ClickOnLink



To Page 1 -
Science and Religion ~ Re-Framing
The Origins Debate





Click Here - Page 4
Finding a Consistent
Origins Rationality
within Religion -





















Print Suggestion: Go To Edit - "Select All"- Print "Selection"
Note: The Code Will Go To Top of Page Before Printing (Some Printers May Not Print Right-Hand Ending Letter - Test Before Printing Entire Document - If Problem - Highlight Text and Save To Text document [don't forget to align bottom of
pages to next top page] and Print.




Email:
ChristianResearchtoday@gmail.com

Please Type
"ScienceTheoryReligion"
On Subject Line





©Copyright Information:
This Article Is Under Copyright
This article may be freely used,
copied and distributed as is,
without modification
or change
.
This article may not be printed
or published or distributed to be sold
without permission of the Author







All rights reserved





For Copyright Information. "

Read Full Text:
http://www.copyright.gov/