Believing, Or Finding Out

IT WAS ONE OF THOSE FACEBOOK POSTS which is divided in half, to show a contrast between people, or ideas. I tend to like those: they often have a good point to make. The comparisions are thought provoking as well as the contrasts; positioning a pair photographs of reprobates side by side, two peas in a pod, like Putin and Trump. On this one in particular, the top half said: "I Am A Christian. My faith means everything to me. You can threaten me, torture me, even kill me, but nothing you can do to me, no matter what evidence you try to use against me, will ever desatoy my christian faith." Then, directly below, it said: "I am an agnostic. I an honest enough to admit that I now very little about the universe. I am willing to listen to every viewpoint, to all evidence concering the nature of reality, and, when presented with convincing evidence for any particular point of view or explanation, I am willing to change my beliefs to conform to proven facts". The post provided a simplistic but very accurate way of demonstrating the diference between religion and science. In a discussion decades ago, someone said to me that "you can't compare religion and science". I begged to differ then, I wholeheartedly disagree now. Religion and science can be contrasted and compared quite revealingly. The reason for the existence of both is humanity's inexorable need to understand the world in which we live. For that purpose religion, any religion, establishes what it considers to be the truth about reality, then enshrines these beliefs into a set of inarguable facts, called "religious dogma", which it declares inviolate, sacred, and indisputable, and steadfastly promotes the explanattory dogma against all competing explanations, and no matter what, refuses to change them. Science begins by acknowledging that no explanations for reality exist, then proceeds to create them, by direct observation, experimentation, analysis, and the process of eliminating explanations proven false, and retaining those which seem to be correct, or, in other words, have not yet been proven incorrect. Religion changes relatively little over time, science is constantly changing. Religion preceeded science, and can thus be viewed as humanity's first attempt at discering the nature of nature, and science as a more modern, effective technnique. The results are what matter. By today's standards, the explanations provided by religions of ancient origination are fatuous in their inadequacy, and become more fatuous over time, as the mdoern world of science advances, and discredits them. The secret to the success of modern science and its increasingly accurate description of reality is in its willingness, indeed its imperative to change, to improve and correct itself. Religion by its very nature cannot abide change, since from the begining it claims to have all the answers. Any individual or institution making this claim is doomed to eventual failure, and to be discarded, as inadequate to the task of revealing the truth about the universe.