First, then, what is science? Surely there can be no difficulty in answering this, and yet I fear that, if I should pass through this or any other audience with the question, I should get many different answers.
A certain lady, whom I know better than any other, has told me that, should she ever be permitted to marry a second time, she would not marry a scientific man, because scientific men are so terribly accurate.
I often hear the same general idea expressed, and it is clear that accuracy is one attribute of science according to prevailing opinions. But accuracy alone is not science.
When we hear a game of baseball or of whist spoken of as thoroughly scientific, I suppose the idea here, too, is that the games are played accurately; that is, to use the technical expression, without errors.
Again, there are those who seem to think that science is something that has been devised by the Evil One for the purpose of undermining religion.
The idea is not so common as it was a few years ago, when the professors of scientific subjects in our colleges were generally objects of suspicion.
The change which has come over the world in this respect within my own memory is simply astounding.
In general terms, an agreement has been reached between those who represent religion and those who represent science.
This agreement is certainly not final, but it gives us a modus vivendi, and the clash of arms is now rarely heard. Religion now takes into consideration the claims of science, and science recognizes the great fundamental truths of religion. Each should strengthen the other, and in time, no doubt, each will strengthen the other.
松绑的灵魂
好棒棒的声音
黛安宏 回复 @松绑的灵魂:
谢谢,继续努力💪