Disagree or Agree?

[The Sum of Awe]

Importance of Science - 100%.
Importance of Philosophy - 20%.
Importance of Religion - 0%.

E.g.

A world without religion - Science advances for nobody used faith to answer questions, nor burned scientific books for theories disagreeing with their unproven faith. We could possibly have floating vehicles, non-polluted environment, and everybody respecting each other. All would be free, and non-human animals could possibly looked at with greater respect and more importance.

A world without philosophy - Similar to the movie Equilibrium.

A world without science - The ancient cultures. Everybody would answer with faith or find 'clues' from a sacred text that 'could be' interpreted to the answer of things. Religion would more continuously grow as time goes on for there are more things to explain without the scientific method in time, thus more superstition.

 

[whereismynotecard]

It depends on what kind of religion it is, and how the people practice it. Some religions seem pretty okay and friendly in the hands of the right people. And though I think those religions aren't an accurate depiction of reality, it might be more fun for people to live in a world where they don't have to face reality... It makes dealing with death easier... Makes you feel more important...

 

[Badran]

For me, the importance of all three is 100%, and none of them oppose each other in anyway. Each one of them has its purposes, and deals with it using certain methods. In the case of Religion and Philosophy, they even share some common grounds.

 

[Revoltingest]

Agree.....plus or minus about 20%

 

[whereismynotecard]

I'd say 0% for all of them... Because really, we don't need any of it. We just need food, water, oxygen, and appropriate temperature. We should all just sit around and be happy without thinking about why all this stuff exists and how it exists... We could just chill out and not worry about it.

 

[Storm]

For me, the importance of all three is 100%, and none of them oppose each other in anyway. Each one of them has its purposes, and deals with it using certain methods. In the case of Religion and Philosophy, they even share some common grounds.

This. I find it tragically ironic that those who advocate "ending" religion are the same ones who whine about certain traditions' oppression of science....

 

[ChristineES]

I'd say 0% for all of them... Because really, we don't need any of it. We just need food, water, oxygen, and appropriate temperature. We should all just sit around and be happy without thinking about why all this stuff exists and how it exists... We could just chill out and not worry about it.

That's right. That's something we never think about. If our needs are met, we never think about them, it isn't until we don't have them that we start thinking about them.
That said, I like having my faith.

 

[Me Myself]

For me, the importance of all three is 100%, and none of them oppose each other in anyway. Each one of them has its purposes, and deals with it using certain methods. In the case of Religion and Philosophy, they even share some common grounds.

Agree 100%

 

[freethinker44]

Some religions seem pretty okay and friendly in the hands of the right people.

The same could be said about grenades.

 

[Acim]

Importance of Science - 100%.
Importance of Philosophy - 20%.
Importance of Religion - 0%.

E.g.

A world without religion - Science advances for nobody used faith to answer questions, nor burned scientific books for theories disagreeing with their unproven faith. We could possibly have floating vehicles, non-polluted environment, and everybody respecting each other. All would be free, and non-human animals could possibly looked at with greater respect and more importance.

A world without philosophy - Similar to the movie Equilibrium.

A world without science - The ancient cultures. Everybody would answer with faith or find 'clues' from a sacred text that 'could be' interpreted to the answer of things. Religion would more continuously grow as time goes on for there are more things to explain without the scientific method in time, thus more superstition.

Disagree.

I'd go this way:

Importance of Philosophy is 100%
Importance of Religion is 50%
Importance of Science is 50%

A world without philosophy equals a world without science and world without religion. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[Mister Emu]

I think the importance of science hinges on whether you mean knowledge or the modern scientific method...

Philosophy is vastly more important than you make it out to be... both logic and ethics/morals fall under the umbrella of philosophy.

 

[9Westy9]

Importance of Science - 100%.
Importance of Philosophy - 20%.
Importance of Religion - 0%.

The importance of these things is surely subjective to the person you ask? I think most religious people would put religion at 100%. The same could probably be said about scientists and philosophers.

Personally I believe they're all important in their own ways.

 

[whereismynotecard]

The same could be said about grenades.

I own a grenade. Not a live one though.

But really... believing in a magic dude who created the universe isn't equivalent to having a deadly weapon. With religion, you can convince a mass of people to do some crazy ****, but you could convince them to do crazy **** without religion too. Maybe if you promise them candy or money... Yes, money will get people to do all sorts of ****** up ****. The "religion ******* people up and making them kill each other" is also dependent on whether the people already are ****** up. They probably have something wrong with them if religion can convince them to kill innocent people and whatnot... So it's not all religion's fault. It's their fault too, for being conformist idiots.

A grenade is a weapon, always. You might not use it, but if it's live, it's a weapon. Religion can be okay, and isn't always a weapon. Sometimes it is... But not always. Like Christine, for example. She's religious, but she's always nice to me and never treats me like I'm horrible and am going to hell. She does religion the right way. It makes her enjoy her life more, but she doesn't make anyone else's life worse with it. (as far as I know...) O_O

 

[freethinker44]

I own a grenade. Not a live one though.

But really... believing in a magic dude who created the universe isn't equivalent to having a deadly weapon. With religion, you can convince a mass of people to do some crazy ****, but you could convince them to do crazy **** without religion too. Maybe if you promise them candy or money... Yes, money will get people to do all sorts of ****** up ****. The "religion ******* people up and making them kill each other" is also dependent on whether the people already are ****** up. They probably have something wrong with them if religion can convince them to kill innocent people and whatnot... So it's not all religion's fault. It's their fault too, for being conformist idiots.

A grenade is a weapon, always. You might not use it, but if it's live, it's a weapon. Religion can be okay, and isn't always a weapon. Sometimes it is... But not always. Like Christine, for example. She's religious, but she's always nice to me and never treats me like I'm horrible and am going to hell. She does religion the right way. It makes her enjoy her life more, but she doesn't make anyone else's life worse with it. (as far as I know...) O_O

Wow, I don't even know where to begin with this. But normal, good people doing horrible things in the name of their god is well documented throughout history. I think the comparison to a bomb is fitting for religion, because it is like a bomb inside someones mind. And like a bomb, if handled correctly it is perfectly harmless and sometimes can even be used towards peace. But when it goes off, it is loud and violent and anyone or anything that is in its way gets destroyed.

 

[Badran]

The same could be said about grenades.

This also applies to science and philosophy. Not that i think you'll necessary disagree with that statement, but saying this about religion only makes it seem likely that you're singling it out.

With science great things can be achieved, but so can terrible things. Depends on who's using this knowledge. Destructive philosophies are also quite easy to emerge and have a negative effect on society. So again, it depends on the person.

 

[ChristineES]

This also applies to science and philosophy. Not that i think you'll necessary disagree with that statement, but saying this about religion only makes it seem likely that you're singling it out.

With science great things can be achieved, but so can terrible things. Depends on who's using this knowledge. Destructive philosophies are also quite easy to emerge and have a negative effect on society. So again, it depends on the person.

What you say it true. A split atom can be a good thing- for power but it can also be used for an atom bomb.

 

[Falvlun]

I'm not understanding how everyone's percentages are adding up to over 100%.

Also, what are we rating the importance on? If by importance, you mean "important in technological advances", then science would essentially be at !00%, with maybe a little input from philosophy. But if you mean "important for the welfare of humanity", then you could have a more equitable distribution of percentage between the three.

While I do not believe many religious claims, or in the existence of gods, I believe that religion has the capability of evolving. Because it is able to exert such an influence over a population, and if it continues to evolve to more of a "lets all get along with each other and work together in harmony" sort of teaching, then it could be very beneficial in the long run.