So, you're not even going to acknowledge your confusion about the stuff you misunderstood / strawmanned?
How... unsurprising.
Yes, consider this:
I can fly unaided in earth gravity. Is that a wrong belief?
Yes.
Unaided, you'll fall to earth every time.
I can believe in God. Is that a wrong belief?
Confusing. Clarification required. What "belief" are you asking about here?
The actual belief in god - if that is a wrong belief?
Or rather the belief that people are capable of believing in a god?
As I told you previously....
There is a difference between the mere fact that a person belief something on the one hand, and the accuracy of the belief in question on the other.
Your obfuscation of those two things, by frequently pretending they are the same, is not helping communication at all. In fact, it only adds the smell of intellectual dishonesty and trolling.
If one of them is not a wrong belief, then there it is.
If both are wrong beliefs, is it the same kind of wrong?
I can't answer this until you unambigously clarify the second statement about god beliefs.
How about this: To some people it makes sense to believe in God, it works for them. Is that enough for a good reason?
A good reason for what?
We are doing morality, politics, psychology and sociology in the end - the good life and what good is? That is the 4th one.
And remember this:
Science has limits: A few things that science does not do
Science doesn't make moral judgments
Is it good or bad to believe in a gods?
The point being made that you are insisting on arguing against, has nothing to do with politics, morals, sociology or any of that.
It has to do with the underlying reasons as to why humans have a tendency to hold superstitious beliefs, of which theistic religion is just one manifestation.
Science doesn't tell you how to use scientific knowledge
And neither is it relevant to the point at hand. You seem desperate again to avoid the actual points and burry it again under a big steaming pile of obfuscation, strawmanning and goalpost moving.
Religion is a superstition. How should I use that knowledge?
Up to you, I guess.
See, you and I state all these facts. That is what science do
No. Science also then tries to come up with testable explanatory models to explain said facts.
Facts by themselves are just data points; observations.
Explains how the world works and but science can't tell how we ought to live our lives.
I heavily disagree, as science provides us very much with the data and tools to be able to organize our lives for the better.
Having said that, this discussion isn't relevant here at all, since the points are about the underpinnings of superstitious beliefs, the reasons why we engage in them. It's not about morals or about what constitutes the "good life" or how to organize societies in order to make humans flourish.
Instead, it is just about explaining why humans have a tendency to hold superstitious beliefs.
That's a scientific question, with a scientific answer.
That is the limit of scientific evidence.
That is the 4th one.
The 4th one at this points, seems to be dishonest obfuscation, strawmanning and plain old trolling.
