RE: Is There a Difference Between Trusting Scientists and Trusting Preachers?
July 14, 2016 at 12:00 pm
(This post was last modified: July 14, 2016 at 1:32 pm by Homeless Nutter.)
(July 14, 2016 at 8:36 am)SteveII Wrote: That is not a conclusion you can make because you are comparing apples and oranges. Even if you don't believe religion is true, it certainly has had an effect and purpose over the millennia.
Apples and oranges? In terms of effectiveness - sure (although it's more like apples and goat-sh*t, really). But when it comes to claims and promises - religion has been making all sorts of those, most of which it never delivered on, retracting them, as science progressed, and started solving problems spiritualist frauds were obviously incapable of dealing with.
Religions used to - and many still do - promise to explain our origin, history, inner workings of human mind and body. Did they? Did they f*ck... Everything we reliably know about those things comes from scientific pursuit, not religious dogma.
Religion promised, that sacrifice, prayer and following dumb and arbitrary religious rules could bring wealth, safety, health and peace. Does it? Does it f*ck... Science, technology, modern medicine, social care and education offer solutions to famine, natural disasters, disease and war.
Religion promised to make people more moral and enlightened. Did it? Did it f*ck... Again - that would be education and higher standards of living, afforded by science and technology, which allows us to have modern, tolerant, multicultural society.
And so on. Religion has now been reduced to basically a hobby, for people who want to believe in magic, while reaping the rewards of rationality. Which is fine - just as long as you keep it in church and don't pretend you're doing anything useful. And f*cking tax it already. All other recreational activities are taxed.
(July 14, 2016 at 8:36 am)SteveII Wrote: What contradictions are there between science and religion? [...]
Are you even serious? At the very core, science is based on an assumption, that there isn't an omnipotent being, that can bend the laws of physics according to its whim. If there was a god - you could NEVER be certain, that he did not affect any experiment, or measurement. Or do you have some kind of magic spell, a "God, please stay the f*ck away from this beaker, Amen" prayer?
If it's possible for someone, or something to bring a decomposing human corpse back to life, or miraculously cure physical ailments - pretty much everything we know about biology and medicine is bullsh*t. If it's possible for supernatural entities to "possess" humans - psychology and psychiatry aren't worth sh*t. If water can turn into wine, if wine can turn into blood - then chemistry goes out the window. If donkeys can talk... I think (hope?) you get the point.
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw