Religion and Science: Roles?

[AVG-JOE]

You are making the huge assumptive mistake of thinking that I, as a free human, have any desire at all to base my morals and political functions on the clerical interpretations of ancient stories about an imaginary friend that many share, but I have the freedom to believe does not exist.

There are still more people who will publicly declare belief in the shared imaginary friend, but there are enough of us who've had enough of those forced morals and political powers that we are demanding our freedom to live by agreed upon, modern, dynamic and timely rules made by elected representatives instead of interpretations of ancient stories by non-elected clerics who are just as subject to corruption and much harder to relieve of duty.

-Joe

Luckily, I'm not making that assumption. I'm basing my arguments upon the fact that all of the world's major religions have succeeded in indoctrinating the world's youth for the past 8,000 years.

People like you and I are a minority when compared with the total of humanity living today, and a TINY minority when compared with all humans who have ever existed.

The whole reason for 'America' as a political concept is for the minority to have the freedom to say "fuck you" to the majority, as long as agreed upon rules are adhered to.

Indoctrination of the youth is not a solution, it is a 6,000 + year old problem. Just because something is old and popular doesn't make it right or fair.

-Joe

 

[eagleseven]

The Crusades were simply looking after Rome's economic interests, nothing more.


The Crusades were a highly aggressive foreign policy designed to line the pockets of a select few in Rome.

Uhhhhh, The Crusades, at least the ones that occurred on planet Earth, happened between years 1095 AD and 1291 AD; the fall of Rome as a world power occurred before year 500 AD.

True, all nine of The Crusades were pretty much directed at the behest of the Catholic Church which was based in Rome, but that is a whole other story. 'Rome' as a world power was dust for 600 years before The First Crusade.

-Joe

Yeah, I was referring to the Vatican there, as the City of Rome was part of the Papal State. Perhaps I should be clearer next time?

 

[eagleseven]

You are making the huge assumptive mistake of thinking that I, as a free human, have any desire at all to base my morals and political functions on the clerical interpretations of ancient stories about an imaginary friend that many share, but I have the freedom to believe does not exist.

There are still more people who will publicly declare belief in the shared imaginary friend, but there are enough of us who've had enough of those forced morals and political powers that we are demanding our freedom to live by agreed upon, modern, dynamic and timely rules made by elected representatives instead of interpretations of ancient stories by non-elected clerics who are just as subject to corruption and much harder to relieve of duty.

-Joe

Luckily, I'm not making that assumption. I'm basing my arguments upon the fact that all of the world's major religions have succeeded in indoctrinating the world's youth for the past 8,000 years.

People like you and I are a minority when compared with the total of humanity living today, and a TINY minority when compared with all humans who have ever existed.

The whole reason for 'America' as a political concept is for the minority to have the freedom to say "fuck you" to the majority, as long as agreed upon rules are adhered to.

Indoctrination of the youth is not a solution, it is a 6,000 + year old problem. Just because something is old and popular doesn't make it right or fair.

-Joe

Agreed. In no way am I advocating for religious rule. My OP is simply analysis of the past.

 

[Avatar4321]

I have no intention of stepping into a hive of atheists working studiously to divorce human development from human spirituality. This is America, not China. Americans still have souls

Chinese still have souls too. Thing is few people understand what a living soul is. They confuse it with the Spirit that makes up the finer parts of hte soul

Fallacious and dishonest? I assure you, my facts are both accurate and honestly portrayed. You may attack my opinions, but my facts are solid.

You have to understand if you dont agree blindly with him, your dishonest. He doesnt want an accurate picture of things. He wants his viewpoints to be validated above all else. Otherwise he would be open to religious experimentation.

If you are going to slander both my character and my intelligence, please back it up with reliable data. Vague accusations just won't do...

I doubt there is reliable data too slander your character or intelligence as such attacks are always based on emotion more than fact. Ive seen nothing from your posts to suggest bad character or intelligence even if we didnt agree on everything.

I think thats the problem with JB. If people dont agree with him but think differently and analyze the world differently they are by definition inferior. It doesnt help with discussion.

 

[Avatar4321]

In the minds of the leaders. It was religion that allowed them to manipulate large numbers of stupid people to fight over 'holy land' in the name of 'god'

You do realize that it was those "stupid people" who kept Europe from being overrun by Muslim invaders dont you? it was those "stupid people" who reestablished trade between Europe and the East. It was those "stupid people" who started the Renaissance by bringing back lost knowledge from the Eastern Empire.

Of course not. You're smart. They were stupid. They did absolutely nothing for modern society because you said so.

hmm... reason.. glorified ignorance.... logic versus fairy tales...

gee, i wonder which speaks to greater intelligence.

Reason is glorified ignorance. Reason is a very limited concept. Reason is based on the assumption that we know everything there is to know on a subject in order to fill in the gaps of our information. Problem is no one knows everything there is to know about a subject.

Everyone thinks they act reasonable. They simply all have different knowledge bases and a different emphasis on the importances of certain knowledge. For example, while I think smoking is completely unreasonable, others may find it totally reasonable. They may not know it can lead to their death, or they may not care and find that the fix outweighs the benefit of a posisble longer life later down the line.

Oh, I wonder whether IQ and education are have a positive or negative correlation with religion...

oh yeah, higher IQ and/or more education = less theists. Religion is refuge for the ignorant mind

First, you are assuming that high IQ and education are complete antagonistic to ignorance. Unfortunately, that's false. Having been through the education system and met lots of ignorance people with lots of education and high IQs. And having met many with little education with great knowledge and wisdom. I would conclude that your presumptions are incorrect.

The problem with this world is there are alot of people educated in matters which are simply not true.

 

[Avatar4321]

Uhhhhh, The Crusades, at least the ones that occurred on planet Earth, happened between years 1095 AD and 1291 AD; the fall of Rome as a world power occurred before year 500 AD.

True, all nine of The Crusades were pretty much directed at the behest of the Catholic Church which was based in Rome, but that is a whole other story. 'Rome' as a world power was dust for 600 years before The First Crusade.

-Joe

Not exactly correct. The Roman Empire continued till abount 1095AD. Many people in the West falsely assume that the Roman Empire fell when Rome did. But only the Western half fell. The Eastern half continued till the fall of Constantinople. In fact, the Crusades were largely begun in response to the fall of the East.

Also, the Western Empire was still largely seen to be represented by the Church. Whether they had legitimate claim to it... eh. But the Church was the power in charge of Rome at the time.

 

[eagleseven]

The problem with this world is there are alot of people educated in matters which are simply not true.

As Marc Twain put it, "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

 

[JBeukema]

You have to understand if you dont agree blindly with him, your dishonest. He doesnt want an accurate picture of things. He wants his viewpoints to be validated above all else. Otherwise he would be open to religious experimentation.

coming from you?! You've fled every time I'm refuted your posts all across this board

 

[eagleseven]

You have to understand if you dont agree blindly with him, your dishonest. He doesnt want an accurate picture of things. He wants his viewpoints to be validated above all else. Otherwise he would be open to religious experimentation.

coming from you?! You've fled every time I'm refuted your posts all across this board

Is it only about winning, with you? Or do you actually intend to convince others of your viewpoint?

It is quite apparent you are only making enemies here.

 

[JBeukema]

Reason is glorified ignorance.

Now you're jjst being silly

Reason is based on the assumption that we know everything there is to know on a subject in order to fill in the gaps of our information. Problem is no one knows everything there is to know about a subject.

incorrect. It is religion that assumes they know all there is to know and can sum it up iin three words.

First, you are assuming that high IQ and education are complete antagonistic to ignorance. Unfortunately, that's false. Having been through the education system and met lots of ignorance people with lots of education and high IQs. And having met many with little education with great knowledge and wisdom. I would conclude that your presumptions are incorrect.

You conclude? based on what- your own ignorance?

more intelligent people tend not to believe in religion. And this observation is given added force when you consider that the above studies span a broad range of time, subjects and methodologies, and yet arrive at the same conclusion.

This is the result even when the researchers are Christian conservatives themselves.

The simplest and most parsimonious explanation is that religion is a set of logical and factual claims, and those with the most logic and facts at their disposal are rejecting it largely on those grounds.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/80198-iq-and-religiosity.html


Some forms of religion cater to dumber people than others

http://www.usmessageboard.com/scien...ntative-study-of-white-adolescent-americ.html

The problem with this world is there are alot of people educated in matters which are simply not true.

And when they make it up, they're called theologians

 

[Diuretic]

I thought the original post was spot on. I liked the evidence to show that humans can progressively free themselves from religion yet still maintain a sense of humanity. But then I suppose I'm just a damn gradualist.

 

[Avatar4321]

I thought the original post was spot on. I liked the evidence to show that humans can progressively free themselves from religion yet still maintain a sense of humanity. But then I suppose I'm just a damn gradualist.

What makes you think anyone is bound by religion rather than freed by it?

 

[Diuretic]

I thought the original post was spot on. I liked the evidence to show that humans can progressively free themselves from religion yet still maintain a sense of humanity. But then I suppose I'm just a damn gradualist.

What makes you think anyone is bound by religion rather than freed by it?

Fair question. And it hinges I suppose on our definitions - yours and mine - of "freedom". Religion affords some freedoms - freedom from fear of mortality is one that comes readily to mind. But religion - from my perspective - also threatens freedoms as well. Religions threaten freedom to think. Fortunately for the nominally Christian West organised religion has lost its power to control and now has to rely on persuasion to get its way in the secular state. In that sense we're free from religion because in the Christian West we can choose whether or not to follow a religion and therefore we willingly adhere to its dictates, whatever they might be. In theocracies people don't have that freedom. And while any religion can exercise political power through theocracy, then humanity as a species is isn't free from religion. Of course secular dictatorships also exercise similar controls and until they're done away with our species won't be free.

 

[Avatar4321]

Fair question. And it hinges I suppose on our definitions - yours and mine - of "freedom". Religion affords some freedoms - freedom from fear of mortality is one that comes readily to mind. But religion - from my perspective - also threatens freedoms as well. Religions threaten freedom to think. Fortunately for the nominally Christian West organised religion has lost its power to control and now has to rely on persuasion to get its way in the secular state. In that sense we're free from religion because in the Christian West we can choose whether or not to follow a religion and therefore we willingly adhere to its dictates, whatever they might be. In theocracies people don't have that freedom. And while any religion can exercise political power through theocracy, then humanity as a species is isn't free from religion. Of course secular dictatorships also exercise similar controls and until they're done away with our species won't be free.

Religion threatens freedom to think? What religion tells you you can't think? Mine tells me to think, to question, to learn. Is it religion or the natural mans tendency to not want to think that causes people not to think? Why are athiests just as likely not to think?

I think there is freedom in truth. And that all truth can be learned from God. I think if we eliminate that source, we eliminate alot of information abou the universe that we cant learn otherwise.

 

[Diuretic]

Fair question. And it hinges I suppose on our definitions - yours and mine - of "freedom". Religion affords some freedoms - freedom from fear of mortality is one that comes readily to mind. But religion - from my perspective - also threatens freedoms as well. Religions threaten freedom to think. Fortunately for the nominally Christian West organised religion has lost its power to control and now has to rely on persuasion to get its way in the secular state. In that sense we're free from religion because in the Christian West we can choose whether or not to follow a religion and therefore we willingly adhere to its dictates, whatever they might be. In theocracies people don't have that freedom. And while any religion can exercise political power through theocracy, then humanity as a species is isn't free from religion. Of course secular dictatorships also exercise similar controls and until they're done away with our species won't be free.

Religion threatens freedom to think? What religion tells you you can't think? Mine tells me to think, to question, to learn. Is it religion or the natural mans tendency to not want to think that causes people not to think? Why are athiests just as likely not to think?

I think there is freedom in truth. And that all truth can be learned from God. I think if we eliminate that source, we eliminate alot of information abou the universe that we cant learn otherwise.

Jeepers Av, you're getting all circular!

 

[JBeukema]

Religion is a disease of ignorance ans mental retardation. Only when the theists whop hold humanity back are gone can Mankind ever truly move forward

 

[Kalam]

funny that you choose islam as you example

Before:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/30/Map_of_Arabia_600_AD.svg/735px-Map_of_Arabia_600_AD.svg.png

After (circa 750):
http://www.truthnet.org/islam/Islam-Bible/2thequran/Islam_map.jpg

philosophy, fool. existentialism, for instance

Existence precedes essence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice that the first three men mentioned all subscribed to some sort of religious belief. Sartre stood on the shoulders of theists.

 

[Lawman]

Religion threatens freedom to think? What religion tells you you can't think? Mine tells me to think, to question, to learn. Is it religion or the natural mans tendency to not want to think that causes people not to think? Why are athiests just as likely not to think?

I think there is freedom in truth. And that all truth can be learned from God. I think if we eliminate that source, we eliminate alot of information abou the universe that we cant learn otherwise.

Like what?

All religions ask you to question, but not beyond the answers that they give you. Like, why don't you question the whole idea of kolob and the aliens? Because your church gives you simplistic answers and doesn't let you go past that, otherwise you'll be booted from the church. Atheists are the only ones who question everything in depth, like why can't anyone see kolob? Or why don't religious people know where heaven and hell are?...

 

[Avatar4321]

Like what?

All religions ask you to question, but not beyond the answers that they give you. Like, why don't you question the whole idea of kolob and the aliens? Because your church gives you simplistic answers and doesn't let you go past that, otherwise you'll be booted from the church. Atheists are the only ones who question everything in depth, like why can't anyone see kolob? Or why don't religious people know where heaven and hell are?...

What a surprise. You came up with a new screen name. Aren't you tired of being banned yet?

 

[Lawman]

Like what?

All religions ask you to question, but not beyond the answers that they give you. Like, why don't you question the whole idea of kolob and the aliens? Because your church gives you simplistic answers and doesn't let you go past that, otherwise you'll be booted from the church. Atheists are the only ones who question everything in depth, like why can't anyone see kolob? Or why don't religious people know where heaven and hell are?...

What a surprise. You came up with a new screen name. Aren't you tired of being banned yet?

? Wtf are you talking about? You talking to me?