Atheism vs religion which bird is a better bird?

[David T]

Don't know a thing about motorcycles.

Analogy!!! Atheists and sever religious fanatics don't get analogies because there is no analogy particles emperically!!! BTW not saying you are enjoy your posts

 

[james bond]

This is patently absurd.

The pre-Socratic philosopher Thales (640-546 BC), dubbed the "father of science", was the first to postulate non-supernatural explanations for natural phenomena. For example, that land floats on water and that earthquakes are caused by the agitation of the water upon which the land floats, rather than the god Poseidon. Thales' student Pythagoras of Samos founded the Pythagorean school, which investigated mathematics for its own sake, and was the first to postulate that the Earth is spherical in shape. Leucippus (5th century BC) introduced atomism, the theory that all matter is made of indivisible, imperishable units called atoms. This was greatly expanded on by his pupil Democritus and later Epicurus.

The astronomer Aristarchus of Samos was the first known person to propose a heliocentric model of the solar system, while the geographer Eratosthenes accurately calculated the circumference of the Earth. Hipparchus (c. 190 – c. 120 BC) produced the first systematic star catalog. The level of achievement in Hellenistic astronomy and engineering is impressively shown by the Antikythera mechanism (150-100 BC), an analog computer for calculating the position of planets.
source: Wikipedia​

This is like saying being white gave us flight. And which Bacon are you referring to, Francis or Roger? And in what manner did either of them give us flight?


.

What was SSE's inflammatory comment? Does he even know what he is talking about?

>>People don't need wings to fly. We have several ways of doing that already, compliments of SCIENCE.

Which technologies has religion given us again?<<

The Wright Bros gave us the first flight. They were Protestants. I suppose white gave us white flight.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

We don't know that for certain. It would be extremely hard to prove or disprove scientifically.

Actually that should be extremely easy to disprove scientifically. (Science can never 'prove' anything.) All you would need is a random sample of individuals and to collect two variables, I.Q. and religious view (atheist, agnostic, theist). The statistics here are as simple as it gets.

You could increase the complexity of the experiment by collecting random samples among practicing scientists and theologians.

 

[LuisDantas]

A true multi bike lover. !!!

Sorry, I don't get the reference.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Did science ever answer the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg? Religion says God created the chicken so there was a chicken before there was an agg.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

You crashed and burned. Christians gave you both science and flight (Bacon, Copernicus, Kepler, Galilei, Wright Bros).

The fact that you can't seem to separate science itself, IE what it is and how it's done, from ones position on cosmology (totally unrelated) is telling.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

I don't think that's really fair - just as science is not meant to tell us the meaning of life, religion cannot be expected to provide us with useful things...

I agree it's not fair to expect religion to provide anything of actual use.

But I don't really think religion is meant to provide us with the meaning of life. I honestly think religion is contrived to justify a confirmation bias that there IS some meaning of life.

TBH, if religion is meant to provide the meaning of life, it has failed in every instance to provide a consistent message. On the other hand religion constantly professes that there MUST BE some meaning to life yet fails to inform what that meaning is; god works in mysterious ways; it's in his hands; you must have faith; just believe brother!!!

Religion does not need to provide the meaning. By instilling the belief that there must be some (unnamed) meaning, religion is able to control the thoughts of countless millions.

 

[Mary Blackchurch]

Science and religion are the two wings of one bird. Both must be equally strong for the bird to fly: “Religion and science are the two wings upon which man’s intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone!” (`Abdu’l-Bahá, Paris Talks, pg. 143).

I wonder if we could now trade the word "religion" for spirituality.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Wow. Religion is part of what makes us human. Unless you prefer us to be robots? There are biological and evolutionary reasons why humans have the need be religious. Religion stems from the experience of what can be called the awesome or the numinous. We also love to tell stories and ponder the meanings and purposes of existence. There is also the impact of ritual, altered states of consciousness and so on. We're just wired that way. We're not completely rational beings and there's nothing wrong with it. No animal is. Check the poem that is the first part of my sig. That was sung by an oral poet after she was apparently struck by lightning or a meteor (probably ball lightning). It made her into a shaman. That was just a natural chain of events.

I, myself, never believed in Santa because I always knew it was my mom, but I still enjoy the stories.

CRUD! Religion may be what you need to make you believe you are human, whatever that mean to you! There is ZERO biological/evolutionary reason why humans need to be religious.

When you really think about what you are saying, you are dehumanizing anyone that doesn't have any religious beliefs. According you you, someone that lacks religion is not a human, but a robot. I take offense at your opinions. Your religious beliefs do nothing to make you human, and my lack of religion does nothing to negatively impact my humanity.

 

[Mary Blackchurch]

Wow. Religion is part of what makes us human. Unless you prefer us to be robots? There are biological and evolutionary reasons why humans have the need be religious. Religion stems from the experience of what can be called the awesome or the numinous. We also love to tell stories and ponder the meanings and purposes of existence. There is also the impact of ritual, altered states of consciousness and so on. We're just wired that way. We're not completely rational beings and there's nothing wrong with it. No animal is. Check the poem that is the first part of my sig. That was sung by an oral poet after she was apparently struck by lightning or a meteor (probably ball lightning). It made her into a shaman. That was just a natural chain of events.

Spirituality makes us human. Religion stems from the need to feel special and only serves to turn all of those stories into "false truths" so as to exploit. I can't think of one religion that doesn't deify someone or some thing in order to do so.

 

[Cephus]

Science existed before Christianity and is not beholden to any religion in particular.

In fact, if there's one thing that has gotten in the way of science more than anything else, it's religion.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Did science ever answer the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg? Religion says God created the chicken so there was a chicken before there was an agg.

Of course they do. The immediate ancestor of the chicken also laid eggs. At some point, after some generations, what came out of the egg would have had enough chicken like qualities to be rightly described as a chicken.

 

[Dawnofhope]

And you told me you didn't read HuffPo ha ha.

I googled scientists and religious affiliation and lo and behold.! I figured if you disliked it so much it must be good!

 

[Dawnofhope]

I wonder if we could now trade the word "religion" for spirituality.

Abdu'l-Baha spoke these words over 100 years ago in France. Back then there wasn't such a disconnect between religion and spirituality. There has been a massive cultural shift since. Religion has now become anti-spirituality, and people who are spiritual are anti-religion.

 

[Dawnofhope]

You gather two groups, one religious, one non-religious, and compare the average IQ of the two groups, look at various mitigating and extraneous circumstances in individuals

Two problems

Define religion?

When Abdu'l-Baha as the leader of the Baha'i Faith spoke of intelligence over 100 years ago he wasn't talking about the intelligence that comes from IQ testing. He was most likely speaking of the knowledge and wisdom that comes from the study and practical application of both science and religion.

However, most scientists are not religious themselves, and describe themselves as atheist or agnostic.

That's a strong statement. Do you have any evidence to support it?

Rather, we should replace religion with a new approach to spiritualism. Something that is not shackled to the past, laced with dogma, or filled with false claims and immoral commandments.

That's what the communists tried to do and it led to atrocities and human rights violations that were unparalleled in human history. Consider Stalin's Russia, Moa Zedong's China or Pol Pot's Cambodia.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Define religion?

Generally, for such a study, you ask what their religious views are. If they identify with a religion, you count them among the religious, and when they have no such affiliation or beliefs, you count them among the non-believers.
This does not become problematic until you go to a place such as Japan, where the concept of "religion" as we understand it in the West is foreign to them, and though they hold views we would label religious they themselves would not consider themselves religious. But, all you have to do is make a few necessary adjustments, and the data is still easily gathered.

When Abdu'l-Baha as the leader of the Baha'i Faith spoke of intelligence over 100 years ago he wasn't talking about the intelligence that comes from IQ testing. He was most likely speaking of the knowledge and wisdom that comes from the study and practical application of both science and religion.

So? It still stands there has never been a positive or negative correlation established between religiousness and IQ. As far as science is concerned, being religious or not has no bearing on your IQ.

That's a strong statement. Do you have any evidence to support it?

Section 4: Scientists, Politics and Religion

Scientists and Belief

That's what the communists tried to do and it led to atrocities and human rights violations that were unparalleled in human history. Consider Stalin's Russia, Moa Zedong's China or Pol Pot's Cambodia.

Advocating for new approaches towards spirituality is a world's difference between a Stalin's dogmatic approach towards state atheism.

 

[David T]

I wonder if we could now trade the word "religion" for spirituality.

Omg Mary , your asking people to dig below the sutface!! We aren't programmed that way in starting schoo!!! Forget it this forum is most definitely not about that. Hell look at my own post, and the utter disregard for it in most of the responses.

 

[David T]

Generally, for such a study, you ask what their religious views are. If they identify with a religion, you count them among the religious, and when they have no such affiliation or beliefs, you count them among the non-believers.
This does not become problematic until you go to a place such as Japan, where the concept of "religion" as we understand it in the West is foreign to them, and though they hold views we would label religious they themselves would not consider themselves religious. But, all you have to do is make a few necessary adjustments, and the data is still easily gathered.

So? It still stands there has never been a positive or negative correlation established between religiousness and IQ. As far as science is concerned, being religious or not has no bearing on your IQ.

Section 4: Scientists, Politics and Religion

Scientists and Belief

Advocating for new approaches towards spirituality is a world's difference between a Stalin's dogmatic approach towards state atheism.

So religion is just a political philosophy.

 

[siti]

Did science ever answer the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg? Religion says God created the chicken so there was a chicken before there was an agg.

Ah! I see! That settles it then!

 

[David T]

Two problems

Define religion?

When Abdu'l-Baha as the leader of the Baha'i Faith spoke of intelligence over 100 years ago he wasn't talking about the intelligence that comes from IQ testing. He was most likely speaking of the knowledge and wisdom that comes from the study and practical application of both science and religion.



That's a strong statement. Do you have any evidence to support it?



That's what the communists tried to do and it led to atrocities and human rights violations that were unparalleled in human history. Consider Stalin's Russia, Moa Zedong's China or Pol Pot's Cambodia.

Science is completelu shackled to the past the last I checked!!! The last I checked the dead past gives rise to the living present. I thought we do a spectacular job of pretending the present determines the past for some odd reason. Are you proposing a new detachment from the past to replace the old detachment from the past? And ovrr time wil your new detachment from the past just be seen as nonsense and replaced with more nonsense? One only has to look into religion to realize how disconnected it is from it's past. It has no sense of history except in its own internal reality separate from before it. The scientifically call it intelligent design or creationism. Is that what you are proposing a better intelligent design?