(September 26, 2009 at 7:18 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:But "Religion" is, by definition, invented by man. So therefore, whether god is real or not, religions (i.e. structured, man-made dogma(s) for believing in a god(s)) have made claims in the name of god(s), which have subsequently turned out to be entirely false.(September 26, 2009 at 7:05 pm)amw79 Wrote: And your misunderstanding is plainly evident within this. Religion has explicitly tried to explain natural empircal phenomenon (evidence) by means of resorting to a "god(s) did it" conclusion. As has already been mentioned, disease (attributed to gods retribution). Lightning (attributed to gods wrath, or Thors hammer).Religion hasn't. People have. People got it wrong.
Religion has over history, explicity tried to explain the origins of the universe, life, man, morality by stating it was the work of god. You may be an 'enlightened' believer, but you cannot erase the history.
(September 26, 2009 at 7:18 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:(September 26, 2009 at 7:05 pm)amw79 Wrote: So fr0do, for example, are you claiming that religion's attempted monopoly on the origin of morality, is an claim/statement of "meaning and reason" as opposed to an empirical scientific claim.
Absolutely. Of course.
Religion concerns itself with meaning and reason. Science concerns itself with understanding the evidence.
You're missing the point, (or deliberately avoiding it). So, if science managed to entirely understand and explain where morality in human beings had evolved and came from, beyond reasonable doubt (as evolution by natural selection has been) - what would be religion's comeback? That there is more "meaning and reason" behind it ???