RE: Evolutionary biology adopting religious traits
December 28, 2014 at 3:57 am
(This post was last modified: December 28, 2014 at 4:23 am by Alex K.)
Sounds reasonable. Well at least you'll have something that keeps you occupied...
Yeah, important distinction: with science, the population knows the method which is used by the "priests", knows how to in principle check their work even if technical specialized knowledge might be missing, and the population knows the criteria for when scientific work is good or bad. That's completely different from religion.
The only context where I have observed something even vaguely resembling what tantric claims is in long-closeted atheists who flock around people like Richard Dawkins, who with their rhetoric provide for them something like an ersatz identity in which science plays the role of a symbol, a shibboleth, a
knowledge which empowers them to free themselves, at least in their thinking, from their religious prison. While I am completely sympathetic to that, sometimes overly naive notions about science and scientific proof can be encountered in that context. But that whole thing is so 2007...
(December 28, 2014 at 3:52 am)IATIA Wrote:tantric Wrote:Part of the problem is that whenever I mention the idea of science and secular humanism taking on religious characteristics, the resident proponents blow a gasket.It is quite simple. Science uses evidence, empirical data and logic. Religions use "goddidit". They have nothing in common.
Yeah, important distinction: with science, the population knows the method which is used by the "priests", knows how to in principle check their work even if technical specialized knowledge might be missing, and the population knows the criteria for when scientific work is good or bad. That's completely different from religion.
The only context where I have observed something even vaguely resembling what tantric claims is in long-closeted atheists who flock around people like Richard Dawkins, who with their rhetoric provide for them something like an ersatz identity in which science plays the role of a symbol, a shibboleth, a
knowledge which empowers them to free themselves, at least in their thinking, from their religious prison. While I am completely sympathetic to that, sometimes overly naive notions about science and scientific proof can be encountered in that context. But that whole thing is so 2007...
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
