Religion: Is it cool?

[JHern]

I agree with much of what has been said thus far. Religion is the only thing out there claiming to provide easy answers to life's most difficult questions. People run to the security of religion to shelter themselves from uncomfortable thoughts regarding life, death, etc.. People turn to religion because they don't want to seek answers, they want to run from the big questions. They run to specific religious sects who always think they're better than everybody else, and who own the keys to a fictitious afterlife ("only through us...").

Science is a rational approach to addressing questions that can be dealt with using logic and experimentation. These are not necessarily the same questions that religion claims to address. I think too many people make too much about the supposed "battle" between science and religion. There isn't any battle. The real battle is between modern rationality and the ancient forces of mysticism. Science is a part of modern rationality, and is feared by religious people because it causes people to think, and is actually interesting and useful. Thus it may cause people who ran away from curiosity and into the arms of religion long ago to become skeptical of what their priests have been telling them.

Anyways, I've been away from religion so long that all the mysticism and ignorance has finally worn off. I see religion as being no different than a bunch of Star Trekkies deciding that Jim Kirk lives on as a timeless spiritual being, and that the USS Enterprise is going to come from the future and rescue mankind from its idiocy in the near future. It is weird, I know, but that's what it is. No religion is any different than that.

Religious people are vulnerable to manipulator who sound authoritative and sufficiently churchy. They'll even be convinced that it is OK to fight and die for them, when in fact those people are the least worthy of anyone's sacrifice. They are promised a great after-life, which is nothing but a huge swindle..."hey, throw away your life in exchange for something really great later on..."yes, many people have been stupid enough to buy into that sucker's deal. Anyways, that's why religion has been used as an instrument of mass control for so long, by bigots, by monarchists, by fascists, by popes, by politicians, by the bourgois class (a strange marriage, indeed, but very successful in the US), etc.. I am instantly wary of anyone who comes from a religious angle to manipulate the populace (the Republican party, for example).

I don't know if anyone has read this (it is already viral), but it is a pretty good rant on religion from Dan Savage, the gay columnist and activist...

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=5135029

I know that we are all better than religion teaches us to be. It brings out many of the worst traits in people.

[jubuttib]

Quickly on the subject of Republicans and science: Like Neil DeGrasse Tyson said, republicans have spent more money on science than democrats. Science drives technology, technology drives business. No republican wants to die poor.

[Roy]

Woah, where did this thread come from?

[Mr. Plow]

Woah, where did this thread come from?

The DKG disc thread. They're a Christian disc company, or something.

[JHern]

Quickly on the subject of Republicans and science: Like Neil DeGrasse Tyson said, republicans have spent more money on science than democrats. Science drives technology, technology drives business. No republican wants to die poor.

Direct funding of scientific research enjoys bi-partisan support, in many ways. And both parties love corporate welfare (socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor), there is no real difference.

On the other hand, Republicans have done great damage to the US scientific infrastructure by slashing and burning public education across the country at the local level. They thought that cutting budgets and teacher salaries could be done while keeping educational quality (or at least they just said so), and they were dead wrong. These days most science and engineering departments at US universities are filled with foreign students who have the necessary math and science background from their primary (pre-college) educations. This includes virtually any Asian country, all European countries, and even a few African and South American nations. All of them are ahead of the US in educational achievement in math and science. We're in the bottom of the barrel. This is in stark contrast to the 1950s and 1960s in the US, when we were clearly #1 in the world in this category...what a dramatic change!

And Republicans have a knee-jerk instinct to embrace authoritarian figures and old-fashioned concepts and ideas. This puts them right in the same herd as religious folks, in that they are running away from curiosity and intellectual development and instead seeking the safety of worn-out old concepts that were long ago disproved...of course they don't see this clearly either, as they have frequently rather odd interpretations of history.

In any case, I'm not saying the Democrats are any better. Recently, they are too eager to jump in and shovel money over to Wall St banks and pharmaceuticals and being chintzy with other budget priorities.

[sunspot]

Science, the new religion.

[Frank Delicious]

Well that's pretty much not true.

[jubuttib]

Unfortunately it is, for some people who don't get what science is about...

[sunspot]

Science, the new religion.

This is a great observation, who made it? oh, nvr mind.

Well that's pretty much not true.

To an extent, I was being facetious.

Well, of course, no one is slamming down Hail Mary's (not the DKG kind) making science a classified religion based on certain practices like those in Catholicism. However, the fervor that some people have in science being the end all of truth approach the fervor of some religious people. In other words, some people in science treat science as the exclusive means of truth with no room for dissent. They hold to a religious attitude (in some case elitism) that religious fanatics hold to. I think this is especially true in Darwinism.

I often find the comments made about religion can be applied to science. Take a look at JHern's post:

... Religion is the only thing out there claiming to provide easy answers to life's most difficult questions. People run to the security of religion to shelter themselves from uncomfortable thoughts regarding life, death, etc.. People turn to religion because they don't want to seek answers, they want to run from the big questions. They run to specific religious sects who always think they're better than everybody else, and who own the keys to a fictitious afterlife ("only through us...").

Let's replace "religion" with "science":

...Science is the only thing out there claiming to provide easy answers to life's most difficult questions. People run to the security of science to shelter themselves from uncomfortable thoughts regarding life, death, etc.. People turn to science because they don't want to seek answers, they want to run from the big questions. They run to specific science sects who always think they're better than everybody else, and who own the keys to a fictitious afterlife ("only through us...").

Science has created branches to deal with the origins of humans, our lives, and our thinking just like religion has done. Any dissent from these kinds of scientific "branches" are considered "blasphemy," and thus have become, what I have called, the "new" religion. Personally, I look at science and religion as complementary, not mutually exclusive.

[Frank Delicious]

Science doesn't provide easy answers nor do scientists hate on dissent, they just require proof. I don't think you quite get how science works considering science pretty much operates best when people are questioning things.

[sunspot]

Science doesn't provide easy answers nor do scientists hate on dissent, they just require proof.

When it comes to the thought of having a being that has created everything, then yes, a lot of scientists are not fond of dissent from the majority of opinion. It really depends on the subject in whether certain things are permissible.

Easy answers come from the streamlined conclusions based on the cosmology of the universe. We know who we are based on the genesis of our existence. We either come from pre-existing matter, nothing, or a created being. These presuppositions invariably identify who and what we are. They, in fact, do make answers "easier" to our existence. Complexity comes from the observation of what we consist of: DNA, atoms, protons, neutrons, and so forth. We are complex, yes, and some of those answers to our complexity are based on presuppositions providing us with easy answers.

It's kind of like a funnel, once you start from the top the rest flows naturally.

I don't think you quite get how science works considering science pretty much operates best when people are questioning things.

I'm sorry for my questioning.

[Frank Delicious]

oh I didn't realize we were being snippy, my bad.

[Frank Delicious]

Like I didn't realize you not understanding how science works meant you were questioning things and thinking outside the box or whatever.

Also please don't turn this into a creation debate.

[sunspot]

oh I didn't realize we were being snippy, my bad.

I'm not 80.

Like I didn't realize you not understanding how science works meant you were questioning things and thinking outside the box or whatever.

Mize mind ain't ursed to want der sceirntistz callez tinkin outsiz dar boz.

Also please don't turn this into a creation debate.

Awwww man, no Greek mythology.

[Mr. Plow]

I think this thread should be renamed.

"Hating Religion: Is it cool?"

or

"Smug Elitists Should Post Here"

The amount of intolerance in this thread is really disturbing.