Which is best for building consensus between people? Religion or science?
Consider a physics teacher in London, another physics teacher in New Dehli, and a third physics teacher in Beijing. Their religious feelings might be quite different. Their politics might be quite different. Their notions about the individual and his or her relationship to society might be quite different. But their views about the nature of the atom are likely to be quite similar --- perhaps even identical down to the last detail.
Does this not tell us something about the power of the sciences to create consensuses between people?
Are there lessons from the sciences in consensus building that we can apply to religion, politics, and other areas of human life?
Which do you think is more likely to unite the world peacefully? One religion? Or one science?
Note for Pettifoggers: Please observe that I said "best". Best does not necessarily imply perfect. So be careful when you offer up as criticisms here things likely to happen only in the minority of cases. Also please note that intellectual honesty requires one to consider all likely interpretations of a statement, rather than only that interpretation one considers most vulnerable and easiest to attack.
Consider a physics teacher in London, another physics teacher in New Dehli, and a third physics teacher in Beijing. Their religious feelings might be quite different. Their politics might be quite different. Their notions about the individual and his or her relationship to society might be quite different. But their views about the nature of the atom are likely to be quite similar --- perhaps even identical down to the last detail.
Does this not tell us something about the power of the sciences to create consensuses between people?
Are there lessons from the sciences in consensus building that we can apply to religion, politics, and other areas of human life?
Which do you think is more likely to unite the world peacefully? One religion? Or one science?