galiel

That is not good enough. Religion says, "follow me and you will be a better person". Based on thousands of years of empirical evidence, that is simply not true. There is a strong argument to be made that religion has made more people worse than it has made some people better, but even if it was a wash, religion has simply failed.

And, if religion does not make believers better persons, then what is the benefit to humanity? what is the point?

By contrast, rational, critical thought, based on empiricism and logic, combined with a helthy dose of skepticism, have not played a major role in any atrocity that I know of. There are no headlines saying: "strong atheists set train of agnostics on fire in India", or "humanist pedophile scandals rock Internet Infidel community", nor, for that matter, can I recall the last time a disagreement between physicists over the Big Bang sparked a bloody crusade across the continents.

And please remind me of the last time a gang of metaphysical naturalists flew planeloads of people into skyscrapers, killing thousands.

Religion simply does not work. Reason and the scientific method do.

Hail

Hi Galiel, I am not saying those negative things did not happen.
Religion says, "follow me and you will be a better person". Based on thousands of years of empirical evidence, that is simply not true. There is a strong argument to be made that religion has made more people worse than it has made some people better, but even if it was a wash, religion has simply failed.

And yes metaphysical naturalists have shown themselves as quite hermonious but I was
pionting out what it's positive element is.

Re:Religion simply does not work. Reason and the scientific method do

I would like to tell you about two members of my family who are notorious for getting into arguments. The funny thing is that the last time I lol while they were arguing because I realised they were saying the same thing. They were in agreeance but didn't know. Then we all lol. I think you will find in a few moons that science and religion were saying the same thing. In the old days they said Jubilation but in or time we'll say enlightement will make us LoL. That is how I see it.

Infinity Lover

Is an individual person religion? I don't think someone would be obliged to defend an assertion they never made.

Atheism is not an attribute, but a lack of. Off course it doesn't cause anything. Can you honestly say conflicts aren't ultimately based on political and economical motives?

Science contributing to peace? How the hell do you think weaponry get's devolped?

galiel

Science and religion are utterly and eternally diametrically opposed, irreconcilable and incompatible. In fact, they approach attempting to understand from oppposite ends of the process.

Saying "can't we all get along" is a nice sentiment, but it has no factual basis when applied to this case. You might say that science is the antireligion.

Hail

galiel, all I can say to that for now is to keep your eyes on the developments in the Unified Field Theory research. It is not unfounded that you woud disagree at this time but check into it and look where it's going besides you sound like you would like that stuff too.

galiel

Ah, I see you have followed me around.
Good.

Relevance? My point is that religion empirically has failed in its stated mission of making its followers better people. Are you saying that religions do not claim that people are better for following their tenets than by not following them?

I most certainly can, and do. Violent conflicts are mostly caused by hate, which is based in fear, which stems from ignorance. Religion is the primary engine for maintaining ignorance, since, by its very nature, it A) discourages skepticism and free inquiry; B) encourages unquestioning submission to a hierarchical authority, and C) divides the world into a simplistic, dualistic "right" (i.e., believers) and "wrong" (i.e., nonbelievers). D) Finally, and worst of all, religion creates a convenient device for abdicating responsibility and putting the ultimate control over the future in the hands of "God".

All of these fundamental characteristics of all organized religions are inimicable to harmony, tolerance, understanding, compromise, and non-violent conflict resolution. History, both ancient and most recent, proves that this is so.

Rational thinking has produced a myriad of creative methods for non-violent conflict resolution. The starting point, that no one possesses the absolute "truth", is inimicable to religious doctrine. As I have said ad nauseum in many threads, science, unlike religion, is not about finding the "Truth". Science merely seeks to find useful models of our empirical reality-- the emphasis being on the word "useful".

Ah, the old diversionary tactic. If we are shifting the discussion to science, which I am happy to do (although I was careful to talk about critical thinking, skepticism, logic, etc., which collectively make up the scientific method, and not just "science"), does that mean you acknowledge that religion fails to make people better? We should first resolve one point before moving to the next.

galiel

Hail developments in science are irrelevant to your claim that religion and science are converging.

Religion starts with a "Revealed Truth" [tm], filters and interprets that truth through a preisthood of some sort, and then delivers dogma to its followers. It is a top-down authoritarian way of understanding. Science, by contrast, starts with empirical observation, applies a test of logical consistency, compares results with the existing body of knowledge, and develops theories which build upon what is previously known. These theories, along with the results of the empirical observations and the logical calculations that accompany them, are openly presented for peer review and reproducibility, a process that tends to weed out human error and individual bias and produce useful results. Science does not depend upon belief in order to work, nor are its theories vulnerable to sectarianism. If you fall off a tall building, gravity will attract you to the ground, whether you believe in it or not, whether you are a physicist or a biologist, whether you believe in punctuated equilibrium or not--in fact, even if you are a religious fundamentalist. The scientific method works everywhere, for everyone, in every circumstance. It is the only unifying set of standards upon which all humanity can agree and which can serve as a basis for cooperation and progress.

Religion and science work from opposite ends and rely on incompatible processes. Never the twain shall meet.

They are no more converging than the Flat Earth Society is converging with the National Geographic Society.

Infinity Lover

I don't think I'm quite ready for "that kind of relationship" lieverd.
You were quoting a question, appearantly demanding justification for an assertion that wasn't made by that person, there's your relevance.

Who's comparing religion with science? You call it an anti-religion. Religion is rather a philosophical discipline with a supernatural twist to my opinion (and no, I don't have to prove that it is my opinion).

How, by the way, would you explain violence and vandalism by scoccer supporters? What are they affraid of?

I think it's rather people failing to make religion work better. And it's also people using science to produce methods of waging war with more devastating efect. Perhaps you're overlooking something very relevant?

Where does YOUR hatred towards religion spawn from? Fear? Ignorance?

Hail

Thanks for the conversation guys. We should chat again later. G'night.

galiel

Then religion has failed, hasn't it. thousands of years and no results.

So there was no war before science? No religion atrocities? No Crusades? No Inquisition? No massive religious massacres in China? etc., etc., etc?

I never said I "hate" religion. Hate is an emotion one should be very careful of. Religious people tend to be very quick to hate.
I merely think religion is irrational, harmful, and has failed its stated mission, and should be discarded because it impede human progress towards harmony, understanding, tolerance and empowerment.

In all your posts, you have failed to respond to a single assertion I have made about religion. Your responses boil down to "well, science ain't so great, either", or erecting strawmen, or appeals to authority. This is a religious discussion, not a scientific discussion. Please respond to my comments about religion.