Should science replace religion?

[wegs]

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).

Your opinion on this matter is no more or less valuable than mine. I've done nothing of the sort that you suggest. You portray your comments about religious people as fact based, but these are merely opinions, just like mine. I'm having a discussion, you are interested in baiting me, for whatever the reason. Because you assume I'm religious? I've stated that I'm not, but you continue to make false assumptions about me. Even though I'm not religious, I see no value in degrading and broad brushing people of particular beliefs, simply because I don't follow what they do. If you want to have a thoughtful, honest discussion without inserting non-truths into my statements that I've never stated, great. If not, I'm probably not going to reply much.

 

[Jeeves]

Yeh
It seems that religions come and go.

Peoples do; nations, empires. Their religion comes and goes with them. It's cultural.

While the underlying "need" for religions seems to remain.

That's debatable - a longish debate.

"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."

What a sweet representation of the ruthlessness of the Roman Empire, and all subsequent Christian empires, killing and torturing their way across the globe, wiping out entire peoples whose religions displeased their god! The ragged Jew was tossed overboard on the passage across the Mediterranean, c. 70AD, to be replaced by a chubby old Italian in purple robes embroidered with gold, who feasted on lobster while his peasant faithful fasted on Fridays.

 

[Goldtop]

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

And, I would argue with each one of them regarding their honesty to themselves and others, which they would have to remove from the equation in order not to look the hypocrites.

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

It might be argued as such, but if we delved into the details, we might find your grandmother, along with many, many others, could have easily dealt with those things without her faith. Indoctrination is a very powerful tool and should never be used as a reason to support the dogma attached to it.

 

[Goldtop]

If religion didn't exist, we would still have war, strife, and there would still be plenty of ignorance to go around.

Can you substantiate that claim in any way? Perhaps, if religion didn't exist and we did use science as our tool for learning about the world around us, Galileo might have been the first man on Mars as opposed to being a convict to religious beliefs.

 

[wegs]

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.

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.

This is a good example of how someone might value their faith, and believe that without it, they'd not get through difficult times. Of course the counter argument is, with all that is available to us in terms of psychological books, therapy, meditation, yoga, and other such secular paths, your grandmother might have assumed religion was her only path towards finding peace. But I have clung to faith at times of difficulties, and have also left my faith beliefs, and dealt with them, in one way or another. If your grandmother finds comfort in her faith, why should anyone judge this?

 

[Jeeves]

You are referring to a parent's approach to treatment, not their approach to the mind of a child,

It's always both. Parents can't separate their feelings from their beliefs. If they take refuge in lies, they'll assume that lies are what their child needs. It may be true - then again, it may be a convenient prop for the parents.

or even for that matter, a religious adult or the elderly.

That's quite different. Adults can communicate their needs and have built their own psychological props. You can figure out from their history, their lifestyle and their words whether they get more comfort from soft lies or hard truths. For a child, we - parents and caregivers - make all the decisions.

My compassion drives my moral choices, not an old book.

Exactly. You can be compassionate without resorting to religious fiction. Perhaps you can be compassionate without resorting to any kind of lies.

 

[Goldtop]

Your opinion on this matter is no more or less valuable than mine. I've done nothing of the sort that you suggest. You portray your comments about religious people as fact based, but these are merely opinions, just like mine.

Except for one major difference, Spidey can substantiate his opinions with reason, facts and evidence.

 

[wegs]

Except for one major difference, Spidey can substantiate his opinions with reason, facts and evidence.

Okay, let's see if he will.

 

[Goldtop]

Okay, let's see if he will.

My point is to understand when you will begin to do that, not Spidey.

 

[wegs]

Can you substantiate that claim in any way?

There is much strife and dysfunction in North Korea, for example. I wouldn't classify Buddhism and Confucianism as religions, per se. But, Christianity is a minority. So, this is one example of how a country that is mainly non-religious, is still filled with poverty, strife and tyranny.

Perhaps, if religion didn't exist and we did use science as our tool for learning about the world around us, Galileo might have been the first man on Mars as opposed to being a convict to religious beliefs.

I do wonder if early ''religious'' people looked at faith to mainly to provide knowledge of the universe. Honestly, many religious people that I know consider science to be a ''gift'' from God, and so they are not in conflict with it. They simply view science as a tool given to us, by God. Just another perspective.

 

[wegs]

My point is to understand when you will begin to do that, not Spidey.

The values or positive byproducts of faith (that differ from person to person), will always be subjective. I've never asserted that faith offers objective facts to support it. But, if someone makes a sweeping generalization that most religious people don't believe in modern medicine, then I'd hope there'd be some evidence to support that statement. Otherwise, it's just an opinion.

 

[billvon]

All religion is characterized by faith, beliefs without evidence

Definitely not true there.

and this leads to bad ideas, like prayer can take the place of medical treatment.

Sure, some faiths can do that. And of course science gave us eugenics and the Holocaust.

Yes, human problems would not all be solved by voluntarily abandoning faith, but many would.

And many more would appear.

 

[billvon]

And, I would argue with each one of them regarding their honesty to themselves and others, which they would have to remove from the equation in order not to look the hypocrites.

I've spoken to quite a few of them. Almost none of them are hypocrites.

It might be argued as such, but if we delved into the details, we might find your grandmother, along with many, many others, could have easily dealt with those things without her faith.

Maybe, maybe not. But it certainly helped her.

Indoctrination is a very powerful tool and should never be used as a reason to support the dogma attached to it.

Really? Even people indoctrinated into science at an early age? They should reject the dogma that is forced upon them by their teachers?

 

[Goldtop]

There is much strife and dysfunction in North Korea, for example.

Because it's a dictatorship under Communism.

this is one example of how a country that is mainly non-religious, is still filled with poverty, strife and tyranny.

The situation of North Korea did not come about as a result of non-religious beliefs. That is absurd. And, you will find, as I did while living in a communist country, that there are a great deal of religious people there, they just aren't allowed to practice it in public.

Honestly, many religious people that I know consider science to be a ''gift'' from God, and so they are not in conflict with it.

Except when it comes to evolution, abiogenesis and birth control, which has provided religious people with plenty of conflict. Knowledge is often evil when it comes to religions.

Of course, those religious people who believe science is a gift from God have obviously never read the Bible. On top of that, they are insulting the people who have worked their entire lives in the pursuit of science only having to constantly defend themselves against religious dogma.

 

[kx000]

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

It means life is gonna be good.

 

[exchemist]

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.

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.

Yes. I think "it worked for her" is the point a lot of contributors seem to be missing.

Science cannot take the place of religion in people's lives, because it does not provide the sorts of things I mentioned in post 5, which are to do with what helps an individual come to terms with the conditions of their own life and that of others around them.

The example of death, which you refer to, is clearly just one aspect of life that religions deal with, but there is no doubt that religions help people to accept their own lot and/or survive the heartbreak of losing those they love, by appealing to an idea of continuity, either in the sense of the hope of future reunification in some way, or simply by emphasising continuity with humanity in past ages who also died and in their turn passed through the same rituals. It lends perspective and solace.

It is not the job of science to do that sort of thing, obviously. And it is idle to imagine that the yearning for such things will ever disappear.

 

[Goldtop]

I've never asserted that faith offers objective facts to support it.

Yes, that would be key to understanding faith and it's alleged values. That's why science avoids the subjective, so that claims of value are substantiated rather than falsely asserted.

 

[exchemist]

Of course, those religious people who believe science is a gift from God have obviously never read the Bible. On top of that, they are insulting the people who have worked their entire lives in the pursuit of science only having to constantly defend themselves against religious dogma.

What a ridiculous statement.

 

[Goldtop]

It means life is gonna be good.

For who? Those who demand their religious freedoms or those who lose their freedoms as a result?

 

[Goldtop]

What a ridiculous statement.

Okay, why?