Religion and Science: Roles?

[eagleseven]

Religion has fulfilled many roles in human civilization, some of which are becoming obsolete due to science. Others still prove to be very useful:

1. Religion as a method of passing down natural knowledge from one generation to the next. Whether through temples, monasteries, or religious schools, religion has provided the environment for much of our scientific development until relatively recently. This function has been replaced by science.

2. Religion as a method of standardizing morality across a society, and between societies. Contrary to what some trans-humanists would have you believe, there is no "universal morality" that humans are born with. Thus, we have developed religion as a way to ensure that every child learns social values. This function cannot be replaced by science.

3. Religion as a tool for maintaining social stability and political power. A population that believes together, stays together. While fighting between religious groups can become intense, religion reduces infighting inside a group. This is what made Islam so initially successful; it eliminated the family vs. family blood feuds. This function cannot be replaced by science.

4. Religion as a method for explaining potentially frightening phenomenon that are beyond a society's comprehension. A prime example of this is blaming natural disaster on an angry god, or evil demon. This function has been replaced by science.

5. Religion as a method for answering existential questions that can be summed in one word "Why?" While humanity has continually expanded its understanding of the universe, it needs religion to explain why the universe is the way it is. Included in this role is addressing death. This function cannot be replaced by science.

Your thoughts?

 

[JBeukema]

Religion has fulfilled many roles in human civilization, some of which are becoming obsolete due to science. Others still prove to be very useful:

1. Religion as a method of passing down natural knowledge from one generation to the next. Whether through temples, monasteries, or religious schools, religion has provided the environment for much of our scientific development until relatively recently. This function has been replaced by science.

This was never filled by science, but by oral history, legends, and then writing independent of religious beliefs

2. Religion as a method of standardizing morality across a society, and between societies. Contrary to what some trans-humanists would have you believe, there is no "universal morality" that humans are born with.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/scien...l-morality-in-humans-and-non-human-speci.html

Thus, we have developed religion as a way to ensure that every child learns social values. This function cannot be replaced by science.

Incorrect, ethics arise through social contract independent of religious belief; religion merely played a supportive role by scaring children. Religion served not to maintain ethics or law, but as a means of maintaining the power structure for the benefit of the ruling elite, who use religion to control the idiot masses

3. Religion as a tool for maintaining social stability and political power. A population that believes together, stays together. While fighting between religious groups can become intense, religion reduces infighting inside a group.

not so. Religion makes internal struggles more bloody as they become holy wars ad the 'we' is split into 'those who are 'right' and those who are heretics

This is what made Islam so initially successful; it eliminated the family vs. family blood feuds. This function cannot be replaced by science.

funny that you choose islam as you example

BTW, it's social theory, social contract, and philosophy and reason, not science

Your lack of education is glaring

4. Religion as a method for explaining potentially frightening phenomenon that are beyond a society's comprehension. A prime example of this is blaming natural disaster on an angry god, or evil demon. This function has been replaced by science.

In other words, an escape for the ignorant so they can feign knowledge

5. Religion as a method for answering existential questions that can be summed in one word "Why?" While humanity has continually expanded its understanding of the universe, it needs religion to explain why the universe is the way it is. Included in this role is addressing death. This function cannot be replaced by science.

philosophy, fool. existentialism, for instance

Your thoughts?

'Gott ist tot'
-Nietzsche


-'the world will be better when that is true'
-J. Beukema

 

[del]

"nietzche ist tot"

one's provable, one isn't.

 

[eagleseven]

Religion has fulfilled many roles in human civilization, some of which are becoming obsolete due to science. Others still prove to be very useful:

1. Religion as a method of passing down natural knowledge from one generation to the next. Whether through temples, monasteries, or religious schools, religion has provided the environment for much of our scientific development until relatively recently. This function has been replaced by science.

This was never filled by science, but by oral history, legends, and then writing independent of religious beliefs

What is religion if not a collection of oral history and legends? You've got very funny definitions, my friend.

Also, were writing, books, computers, and the internet not borne of science?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/scien...l-morality-in-humans-and-non-human-speci.html

Incorrect, ethics arise through social contract independent of religious belief; religion merely played a supportive role by scaring children. Religion served not to maintain ethics or law, but as a means of maintaining the power structure for the benefit of the ruling elite, who use religion to control the idiot masses

The idea of social contract came about long after religion had hammered out morality around the world. In truth, any effective code of laws ultimately developed into a religion.

This is why in both the Middle and Far East we saw the rise of deified Emperors.

not so. Religion makes internal struggles more bloody as they become holy wars ad the 'we' is split into 'those who are 'right' and those who are heretics

Look at non-Roman Europe before the rise of Christianity, and after. Look at the religious philosophy coming out of China. Look at the tribes of Saudi Arabia. Religion brought order.

Order, as it so happens, enables conquest.

funny that you choose islam as you example

Yes. Islam enabled a handful of tribes that had done little save kill eachother for about 16,000 years to forge an empire reaching across three continents in a little under 200 years.

That's impressive for a "retarded, ignorant" religion, wouldn't you say? An empire comparable to Rome...

BTW, it's social theory, social contract, and philosophy and reason, not science

Your lack of education is glaring

Your arrogance is glaring. Religion fulfilled these roles centuries before social theory, contract, and reason were formalized into meaningful theories and disciplines.

You celebrate the leaves yet curse the roots.

In other words, an escape for the ignorant so they can feign knowledge

An escape for the ignorant so that they can overcome panic and survive. Mock them if you want, but they are the reason you and I are here.

5. Religion as a method for answering existential questions that can be summed in one word "Why?" While humanity has continually expanded its understanding of the universe, it needs religion to explain why the universe is the way it is. Included in this role is addressing death. This function cannot be replaced by science.

philosophy, fool. existentialism, for instance

Philosophy? Derivative of religion.

Existentialism? A modern religion.


You think yourself so enlightened, separated from the great mass of humanity...perhaps hubris is the greatest form of self-deception?

 

[eagleseven]

JB, I suggest you read [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Why-Smart-People-Dumb-Things/dp/0671892584"]Why Smart People Do Dumb Things: Lessons from the New Science of Behavioral Economics[/ame]


The fatal flaw of the intelligent is hubris. Given your attitude towards others on this forum, you really ought to read this book.

 

[JBeukema]

What is religion if not a collection of oral history and legends?

You confuse culture with religion

Also, were writing, books, computers, and the internet not borne of science?

They were. What does that have to do with what either of us said?

The idea of social contract came about long after religion had hammered out morality around the world.

I refer to the sociological concept of social contract as describing the emergence of society at its most basic level. I'm not sure what you're thinking of.

In truth, any effective code of laws ultimately developed into a religion.

Really? Has George Washington been declared divine? Laws have oft reflected and been influences by the predominant religion because it is inherently a bottom-up system (no matter who issues a proclomation, it is ultimately the masses who decide whether it takes effect)

This is why in both the Middle and Far East we saw the rise of deified Emperors.

Again, religion is useful for manipulation the idiot masses, and that is one of the primary reasons organized or 'standardized' religions have been so long a part of the human experience

Look at non-Roman Europe before the rise of Christianity, and after. Look at the religious philosophy coming out of China. Look at the tribes of Saudi Arabia. Religion brought order.

You're avoiding my point. The use of neochristianty by Constantine and those after him were not an example of internal struggle, but odf conquest and subjugation of outsiders (non-believers). Look at the wars within christianity after its raise; each religion and sekt declares itself to be ultimately true, thus making negotiation and peace near impossible. One must be wiped out ..

Order, as it so happens, enables conquest.

Religion is not the only unifying factor that can maintain order; it's merely the easiest to manipulate to make good people do cruel things and make the ignorant masses obey you.

Yes. Islam enabled a handful of tribes that had done little save kill eachother for about 16,000 years to forge an empire reaching across three continents in a little under 200 years.

That's impressive for a "retarded, ignorant" religion, wouldn't you say? An empire comparable to Rome...

And when two sekts both claim to be the true religion of Allah? The suffering that ensues when they clash is immense, and the hatred is rivaled only by blood feuds

Your arrogance is glaring. Religion fulfilled these roles centuries before social theory, contract, and reason were formalized into meaningful theories and disciplines.

Wrong. Religion itself emerges through social contract. Social contract has always been the way such things emerge. It has merely been recently that any came to truly understand that an d out the realization into written words.

You celebrate the leaves yet curse the roots.

By your reasoning, one cannot curse American slavery, the genocides against the natives of North America, Hitler's extermination campaigns...

Philosophy? Derivative of religion.

Incorrect. Religion is the ugly sibling of proper philosophy

Existentialism? A modern religion.

Incorrect. Existentialism is a philosophy. Existentialism is not a religion by any reasonable definition. Now you're just parroting the same fallacious BS every YEC and uneducated theist ultimately spews during every exchange.

 

[JBeukema]

Eagle, I invite you to head over to LoR and post the BS you've posted above. My criticisms are only the most obvious. There are others over @ LoR who could write entire books about how fallacious and dishonest your posts have been

 

[eagleseven]

What is religion if not a collection of oral history and legends?

You confuse culture with religion

Is not religion critical to culture? How has it survived even the Atheist regimes in the USSR and China?

Also, were writing, books, computers, and the internet not borne of science?

They were. What does that have to do with what either of us said?

The methods by which we pass on information from generation to generation has been determined by science, which was my original point.

I refer to the sociological concept of social contract as describing the emergence of society at its most basic level. I'm not sure what you're thinking of.Really? Has George Washington been declared divine? Laws have oft reflected and been influences by the predominant religion because it is inherently a bottom-up system (no matter who issues a proclomation, it is ultimately the masses who decide whether it takes effect)

Our constitution is more sacred than the Bible. We have the world's most expensive military for the sole purpose of spreading our faith to all the world. We have formed international bodies to push our beliefs, and believe that our morality is the best in the world. We have holidays celebrating the invention of our beliefs, and massive monuments at which we can pay our respects to our founding fathers.

Is that not a religion?

Again, religion is useful for manipulation the idiot masses, and that is one of the primary reasons organized or 'standardized' religions have been so long a part of the human experience

Religion provides order. Order can be used for the benefit of the masses, or for the benefit of the rulers.

You're avoiding my point. The use of neochristianty by Constantine and those after him were not an example of internal struggle, but odf conquest and subjugation of outsiders (non-believers). Look at the wars within christianity after its raise; each religion and sekt declares itself to be ultimately true, thus making negotiation and peace near impossible. One must be wiped out ..

Compare the wars within Christianity to the near-constant conflict present before Christianity.

Ditto, look at intra-religious wars in the Muslim world, and compare with the near-constant battle of the tribes before Islam.

Religion is not the only unifying factor that can maintain order; it's merely the easiest to manipulate to make good people do cruel things and make the ignorant masses obey you.

Secret police are quite effective at keeping order, and have been extensively used by nearly every atheist government in existence.

Only, the Secret Police don't offer hope of an afterlife.

And when two sekts both claim to be the true religion of Allah? The suffering that ensues when they clash is immense, and the hatred is rivaled only by blood feuds

The bigger they are, the harder they fall. The pre-Islam tribes of Arabia contributed nothing to humanity's development.

Wrong. Religion itself emerges through social contract. Social contract has always been the way such things emerge. It has merely been recently that any came to truly understand that an d out the realization into written words.

The chicken or the egg? We won't agree.

By your reasoning, one cannot curse American slavery, the genocides against the natives of North America, Hitler's extermination campaigns...

One cannot separate America's modern development from its past. Likewise, one cannot separate Human development from its religious roots, as you have been attempting to do.

Philosophy? Derivative of religion.

Incorrect. Religion is the ugly sibling of proper philosophy

Existentialism? A modern religion.

Incorrect. Existentialism is a philosophy. Existentialism is not a religion by any reasonable definition. Now you're just parroting the same fallacious BS every YEC and uneducated theist ultimately spews during every exchange.

We're both parrots squaking opinion at eachother, at this point in the exchange. I'm quite tired of arguing semantics.

 

[eagleseven]

Eagle, I invite you to head over to LoR and post the BS you've posted above. My criticisms are only the most obvious. There are others over @ LoR who could write entire books about how fallacious and dishonest your posts have been

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

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


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...

 

[JBeukema]

You confuse culture with religion

Is not religion critical to culture? How has it survived even the Atheist regimes in the USSR and China?[/quote]

Religion can be an aspect of culture. You were fallacious in treating them as equivalent things

Our constitution is more sacred than the Bible. We have the world's most expensive military for the sole purpose of spreading our faith to all the world.

Incorrect. We use that military to protect our own interests. ''Spreding Democracy' simply means looking after opur ilitary and economic interests, nothing more.

We have formed international bodies to push our beliefs

We helped form the UN in the hopes that we could use it to exploit all the world. then it turned on us.

Is that not a religion?

No, it is highly aggressive foreign policy to line the pockets of a select few

Secret police are quite effective at keeping order, and have been extensively used by nearly every atheist government in existence.

as opposed to.. the levites? The inquisition? Witch trials? Same thing, really

flawed semantics and fallacies are all you've forwarded

 

[JBeukema]

Americans still have souls

Demonstrate that souls exist and Americans posses them and (by implication) chinese do not


Your 'solid facts' are utter bullshit and good merely for a chuckle

 

[eagleseven]

Americans still have souls

Demonstrate that souls exist and Americans posses them and (by implication) chinese do not


Your 'solid facts' are utter bullshit and good merely for a chuckle

You can't distinguish between a legitimate argument and a joke, it seems? Or, you're just a party-pooper? You tell me.

I was referring to China's state-enforced atheism and America's Christianity...but my humor was lost on you.

 

[JBeukema]

Since you are unable to distinguish between secularism, atheism, anti-theism, demagogues, and theocracy, your posts conctinue to illustrate nothing more than seemingly unintentional hilarity

 

[eagleseven]

Religion can be an aspect of culture. You were fallacious in treating them as equivalent things

I stated that religion is composed of oral histories and legends concentrated down so as to be passed from generation to generation, and you disagreed.

No fallacies involved.

Our constitution is more sacred than the Bible. We have the world's most expensive military for the sole purpose of spreading our faith to all the world.

Incorrect. We use that military to protect our own interests. ''Spreding Democracy' simply means looking after opur ilitary and economic interests, nothing more.

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

We have formed international bodies to push our beliefs

We helped form the UN in the hopes that we could use it to exploit all the world. then it turned on us.

Remind you of the Holy Roman Empire? Formed by the Pope to extend the Church's control over Germany, only to have the Holy Roman Emperor invade Italy multiple times...

Is that not a religion?

No, it is highly aggressive foreign policy to line the pockets of a select few

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

Secret police are quite effective at keeping order, and have been extensively used by nearly every atheist government in existence.

as opposed to.. the levites? The inquisition? Witch trials? Same thing, really

So how exactly is atheism superior to religion, again? Why are atheists so enlightened?

flawed semantics and fallacies are all you've forwarded

I'm still waiting for you to name the logical fallacies and disprove my facts.

Here's a list of logical fallacies for you to cite. Have at me!

 

[eagleseven]

Since you are unable to distinguish between secularism, atheism, anti-theism, demagogues, and theocracy, your posts conctinue to illustrate nothing more than seemingly unintentional hilarity

secularism = the systematic replacement of Church authority with State authority, epitomized by China

atheism = the belief that no deities exist

demagogue = someone who appeals to prejudices and emotion to gain support and/or power

theocracy = rule by clerics, whereby the state is believed to be ruled directly by God, epitomized by Iran


Do I pass the test? It's been a long while since I've taken the SAT, so I may be a little rusty...

 

[JBeukema]

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

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'

So how exactly is atheism superior to religion, again? Why are atheists so enlightened?

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

gee, i wonder which speaks to greater intelligence.


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

 

[eagleseven]

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

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'

How many "fools" died FOR THE MOTHERLAND, when Hitler was no worse a leader than Stalin? Not to mention the Freudian implications of such propaganda...

So how exactly is atheism superior to religion, again? Why are atheists so enlightened?

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

gee, i wonder which speaks to greater intelligence.


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

Intelligence does not a man make.


Just what exactly, besides intelligence, do you value in a human being?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Religion has fulfilled many roles in human civilization, some of which are becoming obsolete due to science. Others still prove to be very useful:

1. Religion as a method of passing down natural knowledge from one generation to the next. Whether through temples, monasteries, or religious schools, religion has provided the environment for much of our scientific development until relatively recently. This function has been replaced by science.

2. Religion as a method of standardizing morality across a society, and between societies. Contrary to what some trans-humanists would have you believe, there is no "universal morality" that humans are born with. Thus, we have developed religion as a way to ensure that every child learns social values. This function cannot be replaced by science.

3. Religion as a tool for maintaining social stability and political power. A population that believes together, stays together. While fighting between religious groups can become intense, religion reduces infighting inside a group. This is what made Islam so initially successful; it eliminated the family vs. family blood feuds. This function cannot be replaced by science.

4. Religion as a method for explaining potentially frightening phenomenon that are beyond a society's comprehension. A prime example of this is blaming natural disaster on an angry god, or evil demon. This function has been replaced by science.

5. Religion as a method for answering existential questions that can be summed in one word "Why?" While humanity has continually expanded its understanding of the universe, it needs religion to explain why the universe is the way it is. Included in this role is addressing death. This function cannot be replaced by science.

Your thoughts?

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

 

[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.

 

[AVG-JOE]

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