What do non-religious people contribute to the world that religious people can't?

[PAUL MARKHAM]

I would like to think that non religious people have an open mind toward exploring the frontiers of the unknown. But I don't think that is the case. We are creatures of stories and narratives that like to make us think we have the firmest grasp of reality. There's more unknowns, then knowns though.

I don't think it matters if you are religious or not. Its a matter of your heart being in the right place.

I would like to think theists people have an open mind toward exploring the frontiers of the unknown.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

Well I suppose that might be why they're not out solving today's problems.

Very true.

 

[Augustus]

Religion didn't put a man into space, on the moon, radio, TV, Internet, computers, electricity, chemicals that enhance our lives, disprove the Earth isn't flat, the sun revolves around the Earth, disproved Creation and the universe, Atoms, the list of what we got without religion is endless.

So your point is not that 'non-religion gave us science', but that 'religion is not science'.

Thank you for the information, not a lot of people know that

 

[Brickjectivity]

But they were killed in the name of Communism not atheism

Atheism isn't a person but an idea, and in its name and in belief of it as a social remedy these people were killed. Therefore not only is it ridiculous to say that people can't kill in the name of atheism, as I clearly explained earlier, but they have done so.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

So your point is not that 'non-religion gave us science', but that 'religion is not science'.

Thank you for the information, not a lot of people know that

Not all science was started by non-religious organisations. I just claim the majority of the science we have today is from the secular world.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

No. Why would it? Are you suggesting scientific discovery is the purpose of all religion?

No. The purpose of religion is to form groups within societies.

 

[Vinayaka]

There are no Messiahs alive today.

There were no messiahs alive in the past either.

 

[ChristineM]

Atheism isn't a person but an idea, and in its name and in belief of it as a social remedy these people were killed. Therefore not only is it ridiculous to say that people can't kill in the name of atheism, as I clearly explained earlier, but they have done so.

Atheism is the disbileaf in god or gods, nothing more, nothing less. I am pretty sure someone could kill for the disbelief in a god but i don't recall ever hearing of anyone doing it.

 

[Augustus]

Not all science was started by non-religious organisations. I just claim the majority of the science we have today is from the secular world.

But that's pretty meaningless.

The majority of food we have today is from the 'secular world'. The majority of tennis tournaments we have today are from the 'secular world'. The majority of carcinogens we have today are from the 'secular world'.

 

[Augustus]

But they were killed in the name of Communism not atheism

The comparison of atheism to religion is false though. The correct comparison is to theism. Belief in god and disbelief in god have both been used to underpin broader ideologies.

Marxists explicitly used atheism to reject the idea of the sanctity of human life. Also atheism played a major role in Marxist ideology, somewhat similar to the role of god in certain religions.

Issues such as good and evil, conscience, justice, and retribution found a reflection in the historical mission of religion.… This is why people do not grow tired of it for 1000 years. Marxism also presented itself as a general theory of humanity, a new civilization, the image of the new man. The bid was certainly serious, but life revealed its problems. All the reproaches made about socialism-communism found their reflection in the authority and standing of atheism. Atheism [was] the new civilization’s calling card.”

S. A. Kuchinski, Director of the Leningrad State Museum of the History of Religion and Atheism​

V Smolkin A Sacred Space Is Never Empty - A History of Soviet Atheism

What could a religious person do that a non-religious couldn't?

A couple come to mind ...

• Fly a plane into a building on purpose
• Attach abortion clinics

Once we use the correct comparison of a religious ideology to an irreligious ideology, a non-religious person could do either of those.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

There were no messiahs alive in the past either.

Very true. So why are some so keen to hang on to a version of god to save them? Is it the ultimate superhero cult that will save just them?

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

But that's pretty meaningless.

The majority of food we have today is from the 'secular world'. The majority of tennis tournaments we have today are from the 'secular world'. The majority of carcinogens we have today are from the 'secular world'.

We are discussing science v religion. But you are right everything we produce is from the secular world.

 

[Vinayaka]

Very true. So why are some so keen to hang on to a version of god to save them? Is it the ultimate superhero cult that will save just them?

I'm not sure, but have a few ideas.
- it gives them hope to think somebody actually understands reality
- they can't think for themselves easily, so use the messiah figure and his/her words to do their thinking for them
- the messiah's tribe provides social stuff, or company
- they recognise their own stupidity, so look for someone smarter than themselves, by a lot
- hope the messiah has a 'magic wand' that can heal pain of all varieties
- were born into it, or trained to think that way, and have yet to hit the brain stage of independent thought
- it provides great comfort 'knowing'

Not something I've ever related to personally, so it's challenging to postulate reasons. It's easier to analyse if you've been there personally.

 

[Augustus]

We are discussing science v religion. But you are right everything we produce is from the secular world.

Science and religion are not analogues though.

It makes little sense to criticise something because it is not performing a role that is not related to its actual purpose.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Religion gave us the basic "Love thy neighbour" stuff.
Non-Relion gave us science.

That's a very simplified way of looking at it, but the most accurate.

Science wasn't 'invented' by atheists, and consideration of other humans wasn't invented by religion.
Both have (arguably) played a role in extending and promoting the basic concepts in certain circumstances.