Should science replace religion?

[Jeeves]

Why did you say above ''if I had a sick child, I would take it to the doctor, not a priest.''

I said that in answer to Spidergoat: "I would take hard and difficult facts over comforting lies. Perhaps a dying child would not."
Meaning, even in the matter of dying children, science may be a better answer than religion. And, if we wanted to be nitpickety, medicine also offers palliative care that's more effective than comforting lies. Doctors can be every bit as compassionate as priests, but priests can't be as effective a doctors.

That seems to imply that you assume religious people would do the opposite.

Unfortunately, they all too often do.

 

[wegs]

Unfortunately, they all too often do.

lol Okay.

 

[Michael 345]

Science has already replaced religion, but religion is doing a Hilary not accepting the results

 

[sculptor]

It seems that we often confuse religion and religiosity.

 

[Jeeves]

It seems that we often confuse religion and religiosity.

That's why I specify "organized religion" when I'm talking about the institutions, to differentiate that social phenomenon from the people who profess a faith - and whose degree of sincerity varies greatly.

 

[wegs]

Ahhhh! ^^ Now that's a different conversation, Jeeves. I agree then! Oh, I must have glossed over your posts in which you specified this, and to that, my apologies. I completely agree with you. Religion is also defined (by me) as the organized sort, that often can be just a false presentation or display of sincerity.

sculptor, thank you for bridging the gap in the discussion!

 

[Jeeves]

I must have glossed over your posts in which you specified this

Post #76, lower half of Pg. 4

This wasn't about which people are normal or good or whether the religious have any redeeming qualities - it wasn't about the people at all; it was about the institutions.

 

[wegs]

Post #76, lower half of Pg. 4

Yes, thanks.

 

[Goldtop]

It's a shame that you guys don't seem to know very many ''normal'' religious people.

If they are the ones who can support their claims of faith, then nope, haven't met one yet.

 

[Goldtop]

The topic wasn't "does religion affect you".

Nor, was it about comforting people, your point?

 

[sculptor]

That's why I specify "organized religion" when I'm talking about the institutions, to differentiate that social phenomenon from the people who profess a faith - and whose degree of sincerity varies greatly.

Yeh
It seems that religions come and go.
While the underlying "need" for religions seems to remain.
?
...................................................
Long ago, I read something approximated by the following(about the old gods---olympians?)
about a gathering of the "gods"
"Then feasted they all day
till the setting of the sun
then, along came a ragged jew dragging a huge wooden cross
as he approached the feast table of the gods
the gods grew silent
then
he flung his cross onto the feast table of the gods
and the gods just faded away."

 

[Goldtop]

If anything, I'd say ancient pagan rituals inspired communities of that time, to band together, and celebrate their newfound spiritual beliefs. That bonding experience can be seen today in mosques, churches, temples and retreats. Different beliefs, similar rituals.

If anything, I'd say you're making more claims for the values of faith, but will probably not be able to provide any valid examples, yet again.

 

[Goldtop]

If you believe life.

What does that even mean and how is it relevant? Seems like yet another claim to faith with nothing to support it.

 

[Goldtop]

It is, and it doesn't compete (for me) with religion. I just believe that the two can coexist. Harmoniously, I dare say?

Sure, just as long as you don't have to actually think about or substantiate it in any way.

 

[spidergoat]

Science has already replaced religion, but religion is doing a Hilary not accepting the results

That's a dumb and totally unnecessary thing to say about Hillary, who, as president, unlike the asshole in chief, would have been on the side of science.

 

[spidergoat]

Believe it or not, religious people visit doctors, and believe in modern medicine and scientific evidence. It's a shame that you guys don't seem to know very many ''normal'' religious people.

And some don't, because their normal religion tells them not to. That's the religion I object to, over and above all the other ones who's flaws amount merely to valuing faith over evidence.

 

[spidergoat]

Meaning, even in the matter of dying children, science may be a better answer than religion. And, if we wanted to be nitpickety, medicine also offers palliative care that's more effective than comforting lies. Doctors can be every bit as compassionate as priests, but priests can't be as effective a doctors.

You are referring to a parent's approach to treatment, not their approach to the mind of a child, or even for that matter, a religious adult or the elderly. My compassion drives my moral choices, not an old book.

 

[wegs]

And some don't, because their normal religion tells them not to. That's the religion I object to, over and above all the other ones who's flaws amount merely to valuing faith over evidence.

What's your point? That because of the actions of a few, religion should be done away with? If religion didn't exist, we would still have war, strife, and there would still be plenty of ignorance to go around. It seems you blame all of society's problems on religion (Christianity, more specifically).

 

[billvon]

Sure, just as long as you don't have to actually think about or substantiate it in any way.

No, even if you do. I know plenty of people - scientists, engineers, directors, pilots - who have no problem with the two coexisting in their lives.

If anything, I'd say you're making more claims for the values of faith, but will probably not be able to provide any valid examples, yet again.

Here's a personal example from my life -

My grandmother was a very devout Catholic. Her faith gave her the courage to come to the US almost 100 years ago. It helped her deal with the end of her life; believing she was "going home" made the end of her life a comfortable one rather than a time of reckoning and panic. It helped her deal with the death of family members and friends. (And she always knew when they died and made us go to mass that morning to pray for them.) So it worked for her.

 

[spidergoat]

What's your point? That because of the actions of a few, religion should be done away with? If religion didn't exist, we would still have war, strife, and there would still be plenty of ignorance to go around. It seems you blame all of society's problems on religion (Christianity, more specifically).

You make the perfect the enemy of the good, and spoil a good faith conversation on the flaws of religious thought. All religion is characterized by faith, beliefs without evidence, and this leads to bad ideas, like prayer can take the place of medical treatment. Yes, human problems would not all be solved by voluntarily abandoning faith, but many would. And mainstream religions form the opening that others exploit (sometimes with the best intentions).