Can Science be used to disprove God?

Подписаться 1,7 млн

Просмотров 11 тыс.

50% 1

onepathnetwork.com/can-scienc...
The reason why science can never be used to disprove God.
The beginning of a series of conversations with Dr. Mohamed Ghilan exploring a range of topics involving science, faith, activism, and education.
Dr. Mohamed Ghilan is a student of knowledge who has a Ph.D. in neuroscience. He has previously given lectures on the biography of the Prophet Muhammed ﷺ, Fundamentalism in Islam, Islam and science, the message of Islam, Jesus in the Qur’an, in addition to others. He has also taught an introductory course on Islamic Jurisprudence according to the Maliki School as well as an introductory course on Islamic Theology.
In this first episode, Dr. Mohamed Ghilan puts forth his argument that science cannot be used to disprove religion because it involves a separate paradigm.
Ghilan also sheds light on the myth that most scientists are atheists, citing a study by the Pew Research Centre which determined only approximately 17% of scientists consider them atheists. Historically speaking many renowned scientists were also believers in a greater supreme being.
Be sure to keep posted for future videos in this series of “Conversations with Dr.Mohamed Ghilan.”

Опубликовано:

26 авг 2018

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 50

@YamacKocovali7 5 лет назад

Really surprising to see brother Ghilan here Alhamdullillah. Thank you for this. Edit: Also really glad that this channel is exploring scientific knowledge and issues in relation with Islam and religion in general.

@iliassegha2174 5 лет назад

This is a good comprehensive video, explained in an easy to understand manner.

@websuperspy Год назад

An eye-opener, excellent explanation

@naveenakhter4798 3 года назад

SALAM! Wallahi one path network is the most influential channel I have ever seen

@Sergeexposed1 5 лет назад

Very Helpful Mashallah 👌☝️

@vetonmeha5381 5 лет назад

great approach

@nabeelafarheen8224 5 лет назад

Masha allah.. Well said sir

@SPTECHPLUS 5 лет назад

Scientific Theories are based on assumptions and assumptions can be wrong. That's why different scientists give different theories for same topic. Theories and facts are different.

@samuelstephens6904 5 лет назад

Scientists don't give different theories. They give different hypotheses or conjectures. Theories are demonstrably true. They are different than facts in the sense that they are _higher_ than facts. They represent the full body of facts and observations about a given phenomenon.

@bboystat1x 5 лет назад

Scientific theories best explain the data available to us. However, anytime we find data that contradicts the theory, it must either be modified or discarded. Therefore it can only be said that they are approximations of the truth rather than the truth itself.

@samuelstephens6904 5 лет назад

Statix Sure, although this tentative application of knowledge holds fast to anything. As a skeptic, I doubt we can truly know much of anything for certain. This applies to religion as well, where enlightenment and revelation are all the more prone to irresolvable epistemic problems.

@bboystat1x 5 лет назад

I wouldn't necessarily agree that it would hold to anything and everything. At least we can agree on fundamental truths such as the laws of logic. You did raise a good point, however, that this skepticism ought to be applied to revelation as well and I would be in agreement with you on that. I was merely contending your point that they are demonstrably true. They are demonstrable yes but true not so much. It's kind of like the historical plum pudding model of the atom which has now been replaced with a different model.

@samuelstephens6904 5 лет назад

Statix -"I wouldn't necessarily agree that it would hold to anything and everything. At least we can agree on fundamental truths such as the laws of logic." There are caveats of course. Logical absolutes are one. My own conscious experience is another. But most things fall on a spectrum of that which we can honestly say we know confidently. Certainty is a red herring is my book. Reasonable beliefs are enough to justify actions. -"I was merely contending your point that they are demonstrably true." Reasonably so, at least relative to the OP's misunderstanding that theories represent competing conjectures in science rather than our best current understanding of the operations of something. Our understanding of the world will continue to change, but I highly doubt it will be in such a way that would rehabilitate the claims and beliefs of Islam.

@raselda59 5 лет назад

Nice tropic

@abdulhamitahmet2523 5 лет назад

Please English subtitles?

@heyoulaugh 5 лет назад

Plexx make more videos about adultery and alcohol in Islam

@bartroger7734 5 лет назад

We know that science can never disapprove Allah but we cannot kill the element of faith cause ايمان is a part of our religion.

@RK-si4ln 5 лет назад

English captions?

@shadybaby5309 5 лет назад

R K fucking racist

@brydonthunder 5 лет назад

@@shadybaby5309 he could just have hearing deficits and wants captions therefore.

@digifazil 5 лет назад

Please tell me how you make the intro part of your channel please.....

@AdilKhan-hb9tq Год назад

Yes

@ichakuichu474 5 лет назад

please write this words at down

@johnturner-ch5hv 5 лет назад

@Unknown I --- I was just commenting on the exact same Pew poll that the guy in the video was commenting on, which is the last one done (as he mentions) by the Pew organization (which is in general the most respected organization of the subject of religious demographics). I was simply pointing out that he's being *very* selective (to the point of dishonesty) as to what that poll actually found. It's not true (globally) that most scientists are atheists, the claim that is generally made is that scientists tend on average to be significantly *less* religious than the average of the countries in which they live. And, furthermore the world's elite scientists (those who have made the most ground breaking contributions to the field) in the modern era, tend (with only a very few exceptions) to be atheists.