(July 9, 2017 at 3:33 pm)mordant Wrote:(July 9, 2017 at 3:16 pm)JackRussell Wrote: But science can test supernatural involvement. Even the Templeton study on intercessory prayer rejected that, and then they certainly had a pro-religious bias.Science cannot test anything that's not part of the natural world (= supernatural). If something's supernatural it's irrelevant to discussion, knowledge claims or decision making of any sort.
What science CAN test is the claimed results of certain activities prescribed by supposedly supernaturally originated beliefs or holy books. If "prayer changes things", as the saying goes, then those "changes" should be measurable. Alas, they are not.
Except when they prove how much extra stress religious belief puts on the patients when they know they're being prayed for. So much for it not making them welcome death and a blissful afterlife. Almost like they don't actually really believe that even though they say they do...
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
