Is Science Better Than Religion?

[Ben Dhyan]

And yet you do not show where outhouse made the claim...
But "I" am the one who needs to work on reading comprehension?

......what I quoted was correct....but the matter is now closed....you can believe what you want...no problems...so please let's move on....

 

[Awkward Fingers]

......what I quoted was correct....but the matter is now closed....you can believe what you want...no problems...so please let's move on....

I missed that.
When did it close? I didn't notice anyone accepting they made an error, or acknowledging a mistake, nor anyone stating it was done prior to this comment?

What post# did I miss???

 

[idea]

Is science better than religion? That's like asking is a liberal arts degree better than a science degree, or is an orange better than an apple? Sure, everyone has their preferences and favorite subjects, but no one subject encompasses all subjects.Can't we all recognize both our own areas of expertise, and the value of the spheres of others too?

 

[outhouse]

Can't we all recognize both our own areas of expertise, and the value of the spheres of others too?

Except for one fact your overlooking.

We can live 100% without religion, and have meaningful and productive lives. Not everyone needs the crutch or comfort of theology.

We cannot survive or live without science.

 

[idea]

Except for one fact your overlooking.

We can live 100% without religion, and have meaningful and productive lives. Not everyone needs the crutch or comfort of theology.

We cannot survive or live without science.

The animal kingdom survives just fine without science. Do birds, plants, and bacteria rely on studying equations to survive? No. Survival requires big happy loving families. It requires civilizations with morals and laws that keep people from killing one another. ...

but then some of us are trying to do more than just "survive" ... progression - eternal progression - seems to be a more noble goal to aspire to.

 

[outhouse]

The animal kingdom survives just fine without science.

Move goal post much?


I said we not all animals.

 

[outhouse]

Survival requires big happy loving families

Religion is not a requirement for a happy family.

 

[outhouse]

It requires civilizations with morals and laws that keep people from killing one another. ...

Religion is not a requirement.


It was useful when religion was law ran by corrupt politicians.


Morals have nothing to do with religion

 

[RossRonin]

Religion is not a requirement...Morals have nothing to do with religion

I think morals are very much related to religion. It's true that religion is not a "requirement" for morality, but religion best enables us to comprehend the phenomenon of human morality.

In the form of Christianity, religion explains the origin of morality (a Creator, in whose image we are made); religion provides the source reference for morality (the holy scriptures); religion identifies the moderator of personal moral conduct (conscience, that metaphysical organ that excuses or accuses us to ourselves); and religion grants us the capability to transcend the limitations of an abused, weak, or damaged conscience, bringing it to perfection and keeping it fine-tuned through the process of inward transformation or spiritual rebirth (by operation of the spirit of Christ).

Judeo-Christian theology is the only reasonable context in which you can begin to grasp the reality of a broad spectrum of moral virtues (mercy, kindness, patience, equity, impartiality, honesty, faithfulness, obedience, and so on) being at least universally comprehended, if not universally displayed, by the human race.

 

[outhouse]

I think morals are very much related to religion.

Morals have nothing to do with religion other then primitive people used religion to set morals for violent people as law to keep people from becoming savages.

Many modern people have no connection to religion for morals.

but religion best enables us to comprehend the phenomenon of human morality.

It does help some people I agree.

But again many people do not need it. Remember not all people follow the same religion which all have different teachings.

And if you have not noticed culture plays a bigger part in morality then religion, that is factually substantiated by geographic regions that are less violent then others when people use the same religion

 

[outhouse]

religion explains the origin of morality

No it does not.

It explains the morals of people from a very limited and small time period when people were very violent by nature. roughly from 3000 to 1600 years ago.

People have been around for hundreds of thousands of years within nomadic cultures that did not have these same beliefs.

Only with civilization are laws required that at first were explained through mythology and religion. Only because SOME primitive people used religion as laws would be the origins of this.

religion provides the source reference for morality

No it teaches specific morals designed for a specific people at a specific time.

Lucky though that these were good morals that transcend time, and are still used today by some, not all.

religion identifies the moderator of personal moral conduct

Unsubstantiated

and religion grants us the capability to transcend the limitations of an abused, weak, or damaged conscience

Unsubstantiated for all. Some it does help.

Judeo-Christian theology is the only reasonable context in which you can begin to grasp the reality of a broad spectrum of moral virtues

Factually unsubstantiated. Many people lead great lives with your personal religious beliefs, and are no more heathen then anyone else.


That is the same as saying only your beliefs lead to a good life and that is factually wrong.