3

I am not asking about scientific reason.

Suppose there is a question on our main site. And I want to answer the question according to Hindu scriptures only. There is no doubt in it.

But I am asking whether I have liberty to add a proved scientific statement, if I know exactly, supporting the scriptural statement at the end of my answer in few lines i.e., 100% scriptural answer + (optional) Valid scientific support

Please note that I am asking whether I can add few lines (as postamble) of science, if available, to my answer.

Usefulness of such approach:

It will obviously increase the authenticity of the scriptural statements because of advancement of scientific approach in our times.

| |
  • 1
    Absolutely good idea , but should be in limited manner . we should allow information related scientific validity of our scriptures from a well known scholars only like en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Frawley . Many a blogs are hosting lot's of articles explaining how Hinduism is scientific religion. Those should be avoided. Guidelines regarding this matter are required to be formulated. – SwiftPushkar Sep 29 '19 at 18:15
  • @SwiftPushkar For this reason only, these should articles be avoided. If we are only allowing which say Hinduism is a scientific religion and do not allow any kind of constructive criticism, it means we are biased about the sources. This would be the first step for moving away from neutrality. – Sarvabhouma Sep 30 '19 at 8:41
  • @Sarvabhouma - Yes , we will look at what are policies / views of users /objections etc. on some other similar sites about this. This will give us a primary feedback. Let's see. – SwiftPushkar Sep 30 '19 at 8:50
  • 1
  • @sv. Scientific answer is different from answer containing scientific information also. I am asking whether it is okay to add supporting statements from science after the key answer from scriptures, not as an answer itself. – hanugm Oct 1 '19 at 2:48
  • No, check the other post once again, it's the same thing you are asking: "I am asking whether I have liberty to add a proved scientific statement" - as you know everything stated in an answer on this site has to be supported with references. An answer with 10% scientific statements is not very different from an answer where most of the content is based on science. @hanugm – sv. Oct 1 '19 at 3:08
  • 2
    @sv. What I am saying is 100% scriptural answer + (Optionally) scientific backup.... – hanugm Oct 1 '19 at 7:30
1

This was already discussed under: How should we handle answers with partial scientific speculation and/or partial answers which are not from Hindu perspective?

And the consensus was to either add a citation-needed banner or delete the scientific statements from such answers.

But I am asking whether I have liberty to add a proved scientific statement...

The problem with adding concluding remarks like this is, it will lead to unnecessary discussion under such answers on whether what you claim as "a proven scientific fact" is really proven or not. How do you plan to defend these statements? E.g., check the comments under this answer.

In another answer, a user claimed that brahmins are genetically different from others as they are born with a special nāḍī (nerve). The user added this in support of birth-based varṇa system. When questioned about the source in comments, the answer was updated not with a link to a scientific paper but with a link to a video of an ācārya. Now how is one supposed to validate this scientific claim of the ācārya?

Usefulness of such approach:

It will obviously increase the authenticity of the scriptural statements because of advancement of scientific approach in our times.

To keep it even, are you also willing to add a disclaimer when other science-related statements you are quoting from scripture have no really scientific backing?

You can avoid running into such issues by not making any kind of scientific statements in your answers. And just leaving users to draw their own conclusions.

| |
  • +1 for discussing the problems in detail. I think OP'S approach of "100% scriptural answer + (Optionally) scientific backup" is equally good. – SwiftPushkar Oct 4 '19 at 3:56
  • I think OP is not asking about partial or full scientific answers. But about adding Scientific backup along with mandatory full appropriate scriptural sources. – SwiftPushkar Oct 4 '19 at 4:56
  • 'But about adding Scientific backup along with scriptural sources' - using the same logic, when something stated in scriptures is not scientific, should we add a note saying 'don't follow this, there is no scientific proof for any of this' @SwiftPushkar – sv. Oct 4 '19 at 15:26
  • We should focus more on positive evidances rather than negative.It's not our job to tell the masses what they should have to believe or to follow. They will decide that part. We just can point out the relation between some universal phenomenons already know to ancient people to their new findings.Let the reader should themselves decide whether to accept the relation or not , and what to follow or to discard keeping in mind the modern time. – SwiftPushkar Oct 4 '19 at 16:15
  • 'We should focus more on positive evidences rather than negative' - I'm saying let's not focus on science at all, positive or negative. Answers on this site should be strictly from a religious perspective. That was the whole point of the other meta post. The only exception to this is when the question itself is asking about science found in Hindu scripture. That is the only time we can make scientific statements in answers, compare with modern science, etc. @SwiftPushkar – sv. Oct 4 '19 at 18:49

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .