Will science ever wipe out organized religion?

[3NF]

Originally posted by: tickyour

Originally posted by: irishScott
IE: Let's say we finally figure out EXACTLY how the brain works... and there is no sign of a "soul". Then what?

This could never be achieved. Please read Principles of Human Knowledge by George Berkeley for a reasonable explanation why.

This looks exciting ...

Principles of Human Knowledge

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: Vic
And I'm looking for a scientific charity and, for some weird reason, I just can't find one...

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.results&cgid=5&cuid=14

I was being sarcastic. Remember that 3NF said that religion has never provided a single good thing to society.

All those "good things" are proffered under the guise of proselytization.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: Whisper

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
What's wrong with science and religion co-existing? The world doesn't need your hatred of people's beliefs.

Why does no one ever address this?

Belief based philosophies of knowledge acquisition IGNORE all new knowledge that does not support their current belief.

Belief based philosophies do not ignore new knowledge. Religion is a voluntary gathering within a civil society that is meant to deal with the salvation of the individuals' [that voluntarily joined] souls. It sounds like you have a personal vendetta against religion.

Belief-based philosophies of knowledge acquisition IGNORE new knowledge iff it conflicts with the currently held belief. If it supports current beliefs of course it is accepted. End of story. Read my post before you post again, please.

Not necessarily. I'm sure there are some belief-based philosophies out there that adapt, albeit slowly, to new knowledge. Catholicism, as an example, eventually did accept that the sun doesn't orbit the earth, it just took them a couple hundred years to officially do so. Besides that, many of catholocism's followers adopted the heliocentric viewpoint long before their church did.

Besides that, as others have mentioned, organized belief systems aren't always the only ones opposed to new knowledge. Many of Darwin's critics, for example, were fellow scientists of his day. The main reason he waited so long to publish On the Origin of Species was because he hoped to release it posthumously, thereby evading backlash from the religious AND scientific communities.

Using myself as an example, I am highly religious in terms of believing in a God, but I adapt my beliefs and constantly question and assess my current understanding of them based on whatever new knowledge I acquire.

Well then you are an exception to the WELL established rule. To that i say :thumbsup: .

 

[JungleMan1]

All I've got to say to the people in this thread is that it's pretty obvious that a lot of people in this thread don't know the first thing about Christianity or any sort of organized religion in general. I acknowledge that some Christians are ignorant of science, but I also acknowledge that the Atheists and Agnostics in this thread are completely ignorant of religion. You can't criticize something you don't even understand.

Saying that the majority of Christians believe that the Earth is flat is like me saying that the majority of Atheists are serial killers. It's completely stupid, and has absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the Bible. If you want to actually learn something about other people's beliefs instead of spewing misinformation you heard on the Internet, check out this link:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c015.html

 

[MBrown]

No.

 

[Scarpozzi]

Sure science will wipe out organized religion. I'm not sure exactly how many nukes it will take, but there's no doubt in my mind that our day will come soon. Ironically, I'm sure plenty of non-believers will be praying just before they are blasted.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Scarpozzi
Sure science will wipe out organized religion. I'm not sure exactly how many nukes it will take, but there's no doubt in my mind that our day will come soon. Ironically, I'm sure plenty of non-believers will be praying just before they are blasted.

/taps sarcasm meter

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: Vic
duh
buh
uh
fuh
cuh

/taps the stupid meter.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: Vic
duh
buh
uh
fuh
cuh

/taps the stupid meter.

Wow... that was intelligent on your part!

:roll:


If I may be sharp-tongued again and elaborate on magomago's earlier comment that I have "no bias for or against religion," I must say that he is completely wrong. I am actually strongly anti-religious. The misunderstanding here is that NONE of you are even remotely skeptical enough for me. Your ignorant blatherings are like a religious war. You believe in things you don't understand, but hoot and holler that you're on a winning team, all of which sounds like religion to me, whether you actually call it that or lie to yourself and pretend it's science. It must be nice to be so ignorant, but you're no more blind than is a man with his eyes shut. You have a brain, try fsckin' using it for once.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: Vic
duh
buh
uh
fuh
cuh

/taps the stupid meter.

Wow... that was intelligent on your part!

:roll:


If I may be sharp-tongued again and elaborate on magomago's earlier comment that I have "no bias for or against religion," I must say that he is completely wrong. I am actually strongly anti-religious. The misunderstanding here is that NONE of you are even remotely skeptical enough for me. Your ignorant blatherings are like a religious war. You believe in things you don't understand, but hoot and holler that you're on a winning team, all of which sounds like religion to me, whether you actually call it that or lie to yourself and pretend it's science. It must be nice to be so ignorant, but you're no more blind than is a man with his eyes shut. You have a brain, try fsckin' using it for once.

I will deal with you in the morning.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: Vic
duh
buh
uh
fuh
cuh

/taps the stupid meter.

Wow... that was intelligent on your part!

:roll:


If I may be sharp-tongued again and elaborate on magomago's earlier comment that I have "no bias for or against religion," I must say that he is completely wrong. I am actually strongly anti-religious. The misunderstanding here is that NONE of you are even remotely skeptical enough for me. Your ignorant blatherings are like a religious war. You believe in things you don't understand, but hoot and holler that you're on a winning team, all of which sounds like religion to me, whether you actually call it that or lie to yourself and pretend it's science. It must be nice to be so ignorant, but you're no more blind than is a man with his eyes shut. You have a brain, try fsckin' using it for once.

I will deal with you in the morning.

Deal... how? I could quote every single of your posts in this thread so far and I wouldn't find a single on that is either objective or intelligent. You have prejudices, whatever.... kindly just don't try to pretend that your prejudices represent science.
You chose to make a needless personal attack here with me. Deal with it.


edit: I will quote the only truly correct post in this whole thread:

Originally posted by: FoBoT
moron
science isn't out to get religion

Because science doesn't care. This "Us vs. Them" thing of conflict between science and religion is the product of religion and politics. NOT science.

 

[Theguynextdoor]

lol a lot of high and mighty people in here. Each side claiming they're less stupid then the other, too funny.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: irishScott
Obviously the concept of a god can never be wiped out, but what about the more corporeal parts of some religions?

IE: Let's say we finally figure out EXACTLY how the brain works... and there is no sign of a "soul". Then what?

I also read in another thread that a few religious types seem to think that teleportation is impossible because you'd be transporting your body ahead of your soul or something?

ANYways...

Discuss, and no flaming.

No, I don't think science disproves the existence of God, nor do I ever think it will. It's only fairly recently that faulty science has been used as a religion to declare that "God doesn't exist", or at least on this scale that we are now seeing. In fact, many of the early scientists (and some do today, as well) held the position that science glorifies God, because it shows the intricacies and infinite depth in design of the universe, one that only a fool would say "randomness" created. Science is also limited to the physical world, and it also cannot determine things or events before the universe itself was formed.

And if you take a look at the other thread, no, I don't believe that teleportation is impossible. I don't think, technologically speaking, that we as humans in our lifetime will be able to teleport ourselves.

Your exactly right. In Christianity, the Bible is not a Science book. But in every single place it talks about science, its always correct. Its been man who has been trying to catch up to the Bible in science, not the other way around.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Abel007
No, the day religion is gone is the day the world will end.

WTF?

People simply need to have faith in SOMETHING. Without that then people will no longer have the desire to live.

People will have faith in science.

Secualrists look too much at what extremist fundies do. When you strip away all the fat you come to the realization that without all the religious nutjobs you all find pleasure in bashing, you all would have long since destroyed yourselves.

 

[IEC]

Some comments:

Faith is a belief in something which cannot be proven or disproven. Therefore you cannot have faith in science, even if you can trust science.

The existence of God is something which cannot be proven or disproven. Again, it's a matter of faith.

Science is our best rational, logical explanation for all the phenomena around us.

Religion and science are not mutually exclusive.

Religion and science were quite intertwined up until after the Middle Ages when the Catholic Church began to clamp down on science contradictory to some of their teachings, such as the Earth being the center of the solar system (which has no basis in the Bible)

The divide started then, and has continued to grow as both sides have refused to compromise their positions due to vested interests and "saving face".

Religion will never "wipe out" religion or organized religion. Doing so would be an atrocity in the same sense that wiping out science would be.

Before you start the Christian bashing, remember that the fundamentalists give the rest of us a bad name. Their "evangelism" is an exercise in hypocrisy and has hurt many people. I have no problem stating that I'm an imperfect person who is prone to screwing up, and I don't "have it all together" like many Fundies want you to believe that they do. Churches are meant to be hospitals for the spiritually ill, not the "fortresses" against the "evil world" you often see. Adopting a fortress mentality already shows hypocrisy, because no one is free of sin.

A lot of comments and posts contain quite loaded language I find to be extremely anti-religious. Sure, we as Christians are somewhat to blame... for not rebuking our brothers and sisters who lose sight of the fact that we aren't perfect either. I challenge you to find something actually wrong with the tenets of my faith... you'll find them to be quite good and beneficial to everyone concerned if they are followed properly.

 

[Kanalua]

Meritorious things that religion has done:

I'll just keep it to the "religious" people:

Ghandi - do I even have to list his accomplishments?
Martin Luther King, Jr. - once again, do I really have to list?
St. Thomas Aquinas
Bede, the Venerable
Roger Bacon
St. Augustine
René Descartes
Robert Boyle
John Ray
Desmond Tutu
Mother Theressa
Rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson

These were just men of religion (and the list is not limited to just these people), they were men inspired by religion and in glorifying their God through their works. Many are men of science and men of deep religious reverence. Get over it. There were great minds vehemently opposed to religion in the past, minds much greater than any in the modern world. If they couldn't rid the Earth of religion in their day, why would the weaker minds of "ATOT" scientist think they, or maybe even a real scientist, could do it today...or in the future.

This is such a ridiculous, sophomoric and academic question.

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: Kanalua
Meritorious things that religion has done:

I'll just keep it to the "religious" people:

Ghandi - do I even have to list his accomplishments?
Martin Luther King, Jr. - once again, do I really have to list?
St. Thomas Aquinas
Bede, the Venerable
Roger Bacon
St. Augustine
René Descartes
Robert Boyle
John Ray
Desmond Tutu
Mother Theressa
Rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson

These were just men of religion (and the list is not limited to just these people), they were men inspired by religion and in glorifying their God through their works. Many are men of science and men of deep religious reverence. Get over it. There were great minds vehemently opposed to religion in the past, minds much greater than any in the modern world. If they couldn't rid the Earth of religion in their day, why would the weaker minds of "ATOT" scientist think they, or maybe even a real scientist, could do it today...or in the future.

This is such a ridiculous, sophomoric and academic question.

I think the many of the moral elements of religion can be retained without the supernatural mumbo jumbo or blind attempts to explain the physical world. There's no reason why those people could not have been motivated merely for the good of man kind.

religion has plenty of good stuff, such as telling people to be good. but i think peopel should be good for the sake of being good, to do things that benefit others, not for the sake of going to heaven or not goign to hell

 

[Kanalua]

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: Kanalua
Meritorious things that religion has done:

I'll just keep it to the "religious" people:

Ghandi - do I even have to list his accomplishments?
Martin Luther King, Jr. - once again, do I really have to list?
St. Thomas Aquinas
Bede, the Venerable
Roger Bacon
St. Augustine
René Descartes
Robert Boyle
John Ray
Desmond Tutu
Mother Theressa
Rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson

These were just men of religion (and the list is not limited to just these people), they were men inspired by religion and in glorifying their God through their works. Many are men of science and men of deep religious reverence. Get over it. There were great minds vehemently opposed to religion in the past, minds much greater than any in the modern world. If they couldn't rid the Earth of religion in their day, why would the weaker minds of "ATOT" scientist think they, or maybe even a real scientist, could do it today...or in the future.

This is such a ridiculous, sophomoric and academic question.

I think the many of the moral elements of religion can be retained without the supernatural mumbo jumbo or blind attempts to explain the physical world. There's no reason why those people could not have been motivated merely for the good of man kind.

religion has plenty of good stuff, such as telling people to be good. but i think peopel should be good for the sake of being good, to do things that benefit others, not for the sake of going to heaven or not goign to hell

By that same analysis, one could argue that one could be in science without all the reject God and religion "mumbo jumbo." I believe there is a reason those people were motivated by more than the good of mankind. Religion inspires! It has inspired men for ages (though many have used it to inspire hate). And this is true for science as well. Men have used science to justify racial superiority and science has been the root of wars and hate, too. I would not argue that science is bad because some have used it for and inspired evil because of science. It seems like "ATOT" scientist (and a lot of internet "scientist") want to eliminate religion altogether! You've got one wingnut in this thread who claims that NOTHING good has come from religion!

Sure you could have a ethical system of doing good for good's sake. But in that system, applying principles of reason and rationality, a rational person would realize that there is no benefit for not looking out for ones self. That would lead to a system of doing good for good's sake irrational, the opposite of "science". of course this has been a subject of discussion since the beginning of political thought. See: The State of Nature.

I think there is a reason that religion inspires the great civil and human movements (Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr.).

I also really think South Park hit it on the nail; even if religion was "wiped out," science would become the new religion (as some are seeing it now - Mac vs. Windows vs. Linux....if that isn't a religious battle, I don't know what is...)

Allied Atheist Alliance, Unified Atheist League, and United Atheist Alliance. You know there is more truth to this than you want to admit...

 

[Vertimus]

Originally posted by: Kanalua

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: Kanalua
Meritorious things that religion has done:

I'll just keep it to the "religious" people:

Ghandi - do I even have to list his accomplishments?
Martin Luther King, Jr. - once again, do I really have to list?
St. Thomas Aquinas
Bede, the Venerable
Roger Bacon
St. Augustine
René Descartes
Robert Boyle
John Ray
Desmond Tutu
Mother Theressa
Rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson

These were just men of religion (and the list is not limited to just these people), they were men inspired by religion and in glorifying their God through their works. Many are men of science and men of deep religious reverence. Get over it. There were great minds vehemently opposed to religion in the past, minds much greater than any in the modern world. If they couldn't rid the Earth of religion in their day, why would the weaker minds of "ATOT" scientist think they, or maybe even a real scientist, could do it today...or in the future.

This is such a ridiculous, sophomoric and academic question.

I think the many of the moral elements of religion can be retained without the supernatural mumbo jumbo or blind attempts to explain the physical world. There's no reason why those people could not have been motivated merely for the good of man kind.

religion has plenty of good stuff, such as telling people to be good. but i think peopel should be good for the sake of being good, to do things that benefit others, not for the sake of going to heaven or not goign to hell

By that same analysis, one could argue that one could be in science without all the reject God and religion "mumbo jumbo." I believe there is a reason those people were motivated by more than the good of mankind. Religion inspires! It has inspired men for ages (though many have used it to inspire hate). And this is true for science as well. Men have used science to justify racial superiority and science has been the root of wars and hate, too. I would not argue that science is bad because some have used it for and inspired evil because of science. It seems like "ATOT" scientist (and a lot of internet "scientist") want to eliminate religion altogether! You've got one wingnut in this thread who claims that NOTHING good has come from religion!

Sure you could have a ethical system of doing good for good's sake. But in that system, applying principles of reason and rationality, a rational person would realize that there is no benefit for not looking out for ones self. That would lead to a system of doing good for good's sake irrational, the opposite of "science". of course this has been a subject of discussion since the beginning of political thought. See: The State of Nature.

I think there is a reason that religion inspires the great civil and human movements (Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr.).

I also really think South Park hit it on the nail; even if religion was "wiped out," science would become the new religion (as some are seeing it now - Mac vs. Windows vs. Linux....if that isn't a religious battle, I don't know what is...)

Allied Atheist Alliance, Unified Atheist League, and United Atheist Alliance. You know there is more truth to this than you want to admit...

Science is not a religion, because it doesn't involve faith.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: irishScott
Obviously the concept of a god can never be wiped out, but what about the more corporeal parts of some religions?

IE: Let's say we finally figure out EXACTLY how the brain works... and there is no sign of a "soul". Then what?

I also read in another thread that a few religious types seem to think that teleportation is impossible because you'd be transporting your body ahead of your soul or something?

ANYways...

Discuss, and no flaming.

No, Religion, of some kind, appears to be an universal phenomenon with humans. I can not think of any group of humans that do not have some kind of belief system that involves a supernatural being or force.

I assume that religion fulfills a need or needs. That need could be different for different people. I think science will and does provide better explanations of how the world works and started. But I doubt science will ever fulfill the needs that religion does.

An example to prove my point is my father who was very smart and had a good science education. He was an agnostic. He once told me that he did not having any proof that God existed but he needed to believe he was not alone in the universe.






So unless people\humans change there will be some form of religion.

 

[Kanalua]

Originally posted by: Vertimus

Originally posted by: Kanalua

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: Kanalua
Meritorious things that religion has done:

I'll just keep it to the "religious" people:

Ghandi - do I even have to list his accomplishments?
Martin Luther King, Jr. - once again, do I really have to list?
St. Thomas Aquinas
Bede, the Venerable
Roger Bacon
St. Augustine
René Descartes
Robert Boyle
John Ray
Desmond Tutu
Mother Theressa
Rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson

These were just men of religion (and the list is not limited to just these people), they were men inspired by religion and in glorifying their God through their works. Many are men of science and men of deep religious reverence. Get over it. There were great minds vehemently opposed to religion in the past, minds much greater than any in the modern world. If they couldn't rid the Earth of religion in their day, why would the weaker minds of "ATOT" scientist think they, or maybe even a real scientist, could do it today...or in the future.

This is such a ridiculous, sophomoric and academic question.

I think the many of the moral elements of religion can be retained without the supernatural mumbo jumbo or blind attempts to explain the physical world. There's no reason why those people could not have been motivated merely for the good of man kind.

religion has plenty of good stuff, such as telling people to be good. but i think peopel should be good for the sake of being good, to do things that benefit others, not for the sake of going to heaven or not goign to hell

By that same analysis, one could argue that one could be in science without all the reject God and religion "mumbo jumbo." I believe there is a reason those people were motivated by more than the good of mankind. Religion inspires! It has inspired men for ages (though many have used it to inspire hate). And this is true for science as well. Men have used science to justify racial superiority and science has been the root of wars and hate, too. I would not argue that science is bad because some have used it for and inspired evil because of science. It seems like "ATOT" scientist (and a lot of internet "scientist") want to eliminate religion altogether! You've got one wingnut in this thread who claims that NOTHING good has come from religion!

Sure you could have a ethical system of doing good for good's sake. But in that system, applying principles of reason and rationality, a rational person would realize that there is no benefit for not looking out for ones self. That would lead to a system of doing good for good's sake irrational, the opposite of "science". of course this has been a subject of discussion since the beginning of political thought. See: The State of Nature.

I think there is a reason that religion inspires the great civil and human movements (Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr.).

I also really think South Park hit it on the nail; even if religion was "wiped out," science would become the new religion (as some are seeing it now - Mac vs. Windows vs. Linux....if that isn't a religious battle, I don't know what is...)

Allied Atheist Alliance, Unified Atheist League, and United Atheist Alliance. You know there is more truth to this than you want to admit...

Science is not a religion, because it doesn't involve faith.

So you believe in electrons, quarks, gluons, photons, neutrinos all because you have observed them directly, right? You don't rely on other people who claim to have observed them...well...observed them indirectly and theorized their existence, right?

And we know for sure that Ununoctium, Ununseptium and few other elements exist, because we've observed them, too...right?

Faith in science, it's there...all around you...it's not just some "dark matter"

 

[mect]

Originally posted by: Whisper

Originally posted by: 3NF
All life on this planet was genetically engineered by aliens. Maybe Vic is one of them.

So long as the aliens are hot, I'm all for it.

Thinking about your creators like that is like hitting on you mom...

 

[JungleMan1]

Originally posted by: Vertimus
Science is not a religion, because it doesn't involve faith.

Science absolutely involves faith. One must have faith in the things that science explains or even the fact that the findings of scientists are indeed true (as we are not scientists and cannot personally investigate their claims). 100 years ago, science existed and we thought many things in science to be true that are false today. 100 years from now, we will find many scientific truths that we believe in today to be false. I don't claim to know what they will be, but by its very nature science is ever-changing. Any high school science teacher will tell you this.

In fact, I would say that one must have more faith in science than in religion, as science acknowledges the fact that it could be wrong and is always subject to change, whereas religion is unchanging (only our view of it changes over time).

 

[6000SUX]

Organized religion will never be wiped out, and I feel that it's almost a ridiculous proposition. As for me, I have nothing against non-cult religions, but will be happy enough to see the last traces of the intelligent design "theory" disappear from public-school curricula everywhere.

 

[6000SUX]

Originally posted by: JungleMan1

Originally posted by: Vertimus
Science is not a religion, because it doesn't involve faith.

Science absolutely involves faith. One must have faith in the things that science explains or even the fact that the findings of scientists are indeed true (as we are not scientists and cannot personally investigate their claims). 100 years ago, science existed and we thought many things in science to be true that are false today. 100 years from now, we will find many scientific truths that we believe in today to be false. I don't claim to know what they will be, but by its very nature science is ever-changing.

In fact, I would say that one must have more faith in science than in religion, as science acknowledges the fact that it is always subject to change, whereas religion is unchanging (only our view of it changes over time).

You've got it backwards. Science does not involve faith of any sort, and in fact constantly questions previous findings. The scientific approach is as far from faith as one can get.

Faith believes without evidence, while science reserves complete belief even in the face of convincing evidence.