Blog 13

Tonight, I read the article Is Science Very Different from Religion? A Polanyian Perspective by Priyan Dias. This article is not one of the ones I specifically chosen in the beginning, but this concept is a big issue within the Dollhouse. Initially, I wanted to write my paper about the line between theology/morality and science. The argue behind the article, shown by the title, explores the differences and comparisons of science and religion. This paper holds four claims: inquiry, whereas religion is characterised by practitioner subjectivity. “1. Science is based on verifiable facts, whereas religion rests on faith that is not amenable to verification. 2. Science is carried out in a way that the practitioner is detached from his. 3. Science has had its theories overthrown by better ones, whereas religion is characterised by dogmatic attitudes. 4. Science seeks the assent of all its practitioners, while there are very contrasting views from one religion to another” (Dias 43). Within these claims, a main comparison of this paper is how both science and religion: they are both human pursuits for discovery and action. Claim one is basically saying that scientists rely on experimentation and results supporting their hypothesis for actuality, while religious believers rely on historical concepts rather than evidence. Claim two summarizes that knowledge is brought upon by a personal involvement and a passion. This is for both science and religion. Claim three is about how science and it’s theories are always evolving, but religion is about a structured, concrete set of ideals. Finally, claim four is about how science is a work of all scientists, checking each other’s work, but different types of religion end up bickering and fighting about their own views.