fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2872 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2872 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 019 secrets from Secret Submission Post #410.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I guess to me, it's more of a divide between science as a method and science as an institution. Believing in something because science supports it, to me, means believing it because a bunch of people in labcoats with lots of letters after their names; believing in something because evidence supports it means, obviously, believing in it on the basis of evidence.

It's possible for those two things to divide, of course, but I don't think it's at all likely. But that's not the point for me: even if the evidence supports science, as it usually does, I think those are still two distinct things and two distinct reasons to believe in something.

I see. Pardon my confusion! I guess I don't view science as an institution, per se, not in the context of this discussion, anyway. I usually think of it as the method.

[ SECRET POST #2872 ]

Re: Do you believe in evolution?

Re: Do you believe in evolution?