Jeremy Stangroom

It would be more accurate to say: "We have evidence that religion and science came into conflict over time." No assumptions are needed.

@Metamagician If science is a method of inquiry, can't we argue that they've always been in conflict...?

@PhilosophyExp Potential conflict, I'd say. For actual conflict, you need some actual findings that religious authorities can't stomach.

@Metamagician I think I'd want to argue that ideas, philosophies, methods, etc., can be in conflict (depends on meaning of "conflict", obv!)

@PhilosophyExp methods MIGHT have produced complementary or mutually reinforcing results. But of course, it didn't turn out that way! /3