Now it seems it's the different schools existing within science. Such schools don't matter at all in that greater scheme of things, as they are only exponents of the theses they propose, which await verification or falsification and nothing more.
That's one opinion. I realize that 'the greater scheme of things' for some people (who only want to waitaround for science to tell them what to believe) might be all that matters. But we could all be dead before those answers come. Look at that many-worlds interpretation for example. That -- and many other theories like it -- have sat around since the late 1950s. (That's over 50 years folks).
Pluswhich, I contend that: without some sort of faith (in something), some sense of adventure and/or an actual *interest* in what these theories (seem to) imply about "reality" -- there would be no further progress (or theories even). People would just sit around and wait for research data, rather than stepping out on a limb with scientific speculation. It is *ideas* (theories, guesses, interpretations, conjecture, etc.) which provide impetus and direction (i.e., what intelligent questions to ask next). Also, these theories give other scientists ideas... stuff to ponder, expand, and/or debate [i.e., what does it mean?].
Originally Posted By: alternaut
Choosing sides here is quite irrelevant to the eventual outcome (which is what it is), unless perhaps (and rather unscientifically) one happens to have invested in one theory over another and would feel a loss when one's favorite doesn't come out the 'winner'.
Another dull perspective. I never said choosing a side was in any way relevant to the eventual outcome. Quantum theory isn't about some horse race. It's some deeply, deeply fascinating (and strange) stuff about this world's appearance. Just read some of those interpretations (the summaries and/or explanations in "English" i mean, which discuss philosophical and other more comprehensible facets... the math is strictly for geniuses). While no doubt the eventual outcome is important... the theories -- as they exist now -- are still highly worthy in their own right (inasmuch as they indicate where we need to go and what sorts of stuff to look for). And no matter which one "wins" -- our current choices are chock full of rich, weird conversational substance.
Need i restate this thread's title again? [if you want to start a thread called "Explained Scientific Principles" for discussing the "greater scheme"... then enjoy.  ]
Originally Posted By: alternaut
The bottom line is that 'science' doesn't have an agenda beyond doing what it purports to do: explaining the physical world. It can be argued that religion does, to the extent that it (imprudently) chose to appropriate the exegesis of reality to further its influence. Sure, the current state of affairs in science would allow one to question many religious positions regarding the physical world, but that is not the purpose of the endeavor. Still, the inevitability of this process increasingly causes dogmatic religion grief in maintaining its stance on the topic, a situation it cannot help but perceive as threatening.
Yeah... but those aspects were never really disputed here (not by me). That anti-religion angle has been repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated and repeated ... but i never took any position ["believe what you want" isn't a single position]. There have been a lot of posts here, seemingly aimed at some invisible foe. I would suggest if folks want to attack religion with any effectiveness, go register at some religious website and party down. [or perhaps the mods here wish to start a special 'Religion' forum?]
Originally Posted By: alternaut
I consider it largely a waste of breath to throw specific scientific findings against religion, because both use different frames of mind and reference.
That hasn't been my goal... so i guess we agree. In fact, if i were to have some goal along those lines... it would actually be more attuned to the thinking of Capra, et. al., who see the two eventually merging. Not a specific "religion" mind you... just that: if there is a Creator... and if science is so &*$#ing smart... the two may yet meet someday. I personally don't think it will happen... since science will get closer and closer to the fact [realization] that the forces we are trying to obtain full knowledge of will get harder and harder for our [collective human] consciousness to capture.
And... isn't that almost what every theory in those quantum schools seems to be saying? I may be wrong. What do you think they prophesy?
[if you just want to wait around for the right answer to come along... i understand.]
 ] 
