SvennoJ said:
purkjr said:
Unfortunately, there is a lot of religion-based terrorism and other problematic behaviour. We have had religion wars, crusades and in modern times shootings and self-bombings.That hurts! However, there were some really problematic periods in history when the damage was done from a strictly atheistic world-view. I just name Pol Pot (Cambodia) and Mao Zedong (China) for example. Both made millions of victims. I don't think the problem is religion (or atheism, for that matter) Both can be used in a damaging way. I've read some people saying they 'belief' in science or 'follow the path of reason' as opposed to religion. That intrigues me in two ways. First of all, this paints a picture of reason vs religion (or faith) But I don't see a opposition between those two. For example, I'm a religious man and also an academic with a cum laude degree. In fact, the most brilliant scientist can be religious people (just google on Francis Collins, for example) Why should religion be opposed to reason? Second, I'm wondering which science or reason do you mean when you claim something like that? I think science is very important, but I'm not believing in it. In fact, science proved that 40% of the scientifical claims made today, will be outdated in the next 20 years. So again: how can I 'believe' in science? Just to be clear: I'm not saying science is not important, I'm just wondering how I can 'believe' in it. |
The 'belief' is in the scientific process, critical thinking, which is how scientific claims get corrected and improved all the time. For progress.
Religion strives for certainty, stability, doesn't stimulate critical thinking rather the opposite. Against progress.
That's how religion and science are opposites.Â
Science is far more damaging than religion, global warming, weapons of mass destruction, remote control industrial scale killing. But also made life much better, curing and extinguishing many diseases increasing avg life span by 55 years over the last 2,000 years.
I rather belief in Universal Human Rights and IHL than any particular religion for morality. Both religious and atheist countries ignore Human rights when it suits them, so can't say who is worse :/ Capitalism is. |
OK, thanks for your thought-provoking answer!
I can see your point. I don't think I ever want something to do with religion which is keeping me dumb and is disencouraging critical thinking.
However...I'm just wondering which religion you are opposing to. I don't know many religions who argue against progress. Which disencourage critical thinking. In fact: did you know the 'scientific process" you are referring to, is derived from deep-rooted christian thinking? Did you know the first universities emerged from cloisters?Did you know those 'Universal Human Rights' are not so universal but stem from christian theology, especially from the belief that every human is created in the image of God? To cut things short: I have the feeling you are separating things which cannot be so easily separated.
Let me be clear: feel free to believe whatever you want. But I very much doubt that we are living in a world with two kinds of people: religious or rational. That doesn't make sense for religious scientists like me. It's not in line with the history of science. And, last but not least: why should faith be strictly non-rational? Many religious people have rational arguments for their faith.
OK, so far for now 
