Science: A Religion? (long post)

[genkaus]

I'm not sure what you mean by 'it's application in other fields'? As far as I can see it's used for two things, either it is ploughed back into scientific endeavour (as research) or it is used to meet human needs (medicine, comfort, travel, etc.), what else is there? The first needs no comment from me as it is already implicitly covered (by recursion), the second is the subject of the rest of the post. I'd be happy to debate that with you but you'll need to tell me what you mean by 'other fields'.

That's precisely what I mean - scientific principles being applied to meet human needs (medicine, comfort, travel etc.) fall under technology and engineering - not science itself.

I'm sorry you feel it meanders but I wasn't posting it for a literary critique, there are other forums for that.

I don't think the purpose of philosophy, political and social movement (other than those debated) or the pursuit of arts is to deliver hope and censorship.

Then you need to make a distinction between "can serve the purpose" and "is the purpose".

All of the stated fields can serve that purpose even if it is not their stated goal - same as science. Similarly, the stated purpose of science is to provide a provide a better understanding of the world around you - not giving hope and censorship.

Philosophy is the intellectual exploration of ideas. While I agree politics does deliver censorship this is not carried out in order to deliver on hope (despite their attempts to create 'problems' they can 'rescue' us from), I'll agree it trades on that concept but as far as I am aware no political system has ever delivered on it.

One should take care with politics because politics both appeals to the authority of scientific endeavour - like it used to appeal to religious authority in the West and still does in some countries - and politics is embedded in scientific institutions. That is why I made a point of identifying it at the start of the post (See: Scientific Authority).

Given the distinction above, the rest of your argument becomes pointless.

I could not disagree with you more on the next point, there are no supernatural agencies in Buddhism (the fifth largest religion), Taoism, Wicca, pantheism, most of the 'new-age' religions of the modern era and any of the naturalist religions. 'Supernatural agencies' are not a feature of all religions but of some. As I am not making comparisons with particular religions but with religion in general then the argument for 'supernatural agencies' is negated as it is not indicative. I completely reject that point on the basis it is not correct.

A supernatural agency does not necessarily mean a god. Buddhism refers to supernatural planes of existence - in fact, being Buddha (enlightened) itself means being free from cycle of rebirth among other supernatural attributes. Taoism has its own pantheon of deities. Wiccans are traditionally duotheistic. Pantheists attribute supernatural, intellegent agency to universe itself. Sorry, but I haven't heard of any religion where supernatural agencies have not been indicated.

I would be interested (seeing as you don't point it out in your post) other than hope and censorship, what other needs do all religions fulfil, generally speaking?

It serves as a sort of rudimentary philosophy - claiming to provide answers about the nature of world around you.

Communism is built on class and economics. That was Karl Marx fundamental starting point. He wanted to irradiate the gap between what he called the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat and make a fairer system. For Marx, culture was the structure based on economy.

Religion is not concerned with economics or class.

Nowhere in your given definition does it say that religion is not concerned with economics or class. Nor does it say that something that is built on a fundamental of class and economics cannot become a religion.

Compare your own definition:

"'A religion (communism) is an organized collection of beliefs (regarding how economics works), cultural systems (developed among the proletariat), and world views (regarding how the political system works) that relate humanity to an order of existence (specifically, the order of class and economics)."

Nothing in your definition rules it out as a religion.