Re: Religion or Science. Which is more cool?


"The_Man" <me_so_horneeeee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1185067191.649674.238460@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jul 21, 7:54 pm, "Karl Uppiano" <karl.uppi...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"The_Man" <me_so_hornee...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1185050647.309378.74100@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jul 20, 5:16 am, rick_so...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Can Stephen Hawking do thIS!

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1767317/

Religion has saved 0 lives.

Religion's job is not to save lives.

That is a good thing, since it would fail miserably.

It answers the question "what is the
purpose of humanity?"

But that question can be answered without religion. It can be answered
by philosphy, tradition, custom, politics. Such are the answers of
religion that most practioners, when push comes to shove, don't really
believe them anyway.

Sure. But there seems to be a movement to give Cristianity the bum's rush,
and I think that would be a regrettable loss. Much philosophy, tradition,
custom and even politics, are based on it. Not that I am anxious to preserve
whatever it is that passes for Christianity these days, but we should not be
too hasty, lest we throw the baby out with the bathwater.

BTW, Cf. "The Antichrist" by Nietzsche

I paraphrase.. "Don't let anyone tell me about the humanitarian
blessings of Christianity. Christianity doesn't exist to limit man's
misfortune, but rather it seeks to increase man's misfortune, so that
it can eternalize itself."

That is a very bleak and cynical view. Cristianity certainly went through
some phases (e.g., the Holy Roman Empire) where I am sure they were at odds
with Christ's own teaching. As I said in an earlier post, religious
malpractitioners abound.

If we took the answer to this question seriously, then
we would make better choices in what we ask of science.

Maybe.


Science has saved many millions.(Sanitation, antibiotics,
immunization, medicines, mechanization of agriculture, imporved
transportation to take varied diet great distances with minimal waste,
weather satellites to warn of hurricanes/tornados, communications to
send help faster,....)

Science wins.

Science answers the question "how can I get what I want?"[1] Depending on
what we want (medicine or bombs) science neither wins nor loses.

Numerous religious malpractitioners think you can use religion to get
what
you want (i.e., science's role - hence the confusion). Using religion to
get
what you want is idolatry, and gives no clue to the purpose of humanity.

But the "purpose" of humanity is to "serve god", which is nearly no
purpose at all.

That's the sound bite version, which does seem to have minimal value to
humans. If we all treated each other as we would like to be treated (act in
God's image), it doesn't seem quite so empty.

It
is this popular illusion of "religion" that people mistake for
superstition
or magic, which it is.

[1] I know people will argue that science is, or should be, the abstract
pursuit of knowledge, which some people find rewarding in itself, but for
the rest of humanity, all technology is based on what we learn from
science.

You say that as if it were a bad thing. The escape from the irons laws
of the jungel (Malthus) is the "leverage: from technology. With
religion alone, we are still just savages in the jungle.

I'm not sure which statement you think I'm saying as if it a bad thing. I
think people mistaking religion (especially Christianity) as a utilitarian
force to be tapped for our own purposes is a bad thing.

I see science and religion as orthogonal, complementary disciplines. I would
extend your statement thus: With religion alone, or science alone, we are
still just savages in the jungle.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Justice and Equity
    ... Yet it is science which has informed us that in many cases the cause ... science which has given us this very useful information not religion. ... recognise is our common humanity. ... reformation is reason. ...
    (soc.religion.bahai)
  • Re: God and evolution
    ... hello jan...well here's where i have a problem with dulles' article. ... any kind of governing purpose or finality. ... religion MUST be part of science. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Book-able view of ID as speculative science
    ... >>> interesting to waste time in a science text book. ... >>> Chalk up first amendment law to the list of things you don't know. ... >>> rules for disallowing religious laws is purpose. ... Well it is not religion. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ideals
    ... is the overall purpose of life in your opinion? ... religion cannot be the same, ... true science is that which advances civilization I am not sure we have made ... believe scientists would work on products that are harmful. ...
    (soc.religion.bahai)
  • Re: new human ancestor skeleton found
    ... said Tim White, director of the Human Evolution ... for them to understand science as an ongoing development. ... on religion in general. ... it works FOR humanity and should not work against humanity. ...
    (talk.origins)