Again religion =/ culture. You have to try and untangle the two.
There are loads of religiously people in science, even within stem cell reserch.
Will God accept you if you renounce religion?
- Thread starter craptakular
- Start date
Again religion =/ culture. You have to try and untangle the two.
There are loads of religiously people in science, even within stem cell reserch.
Indeed.
“Religion is notorious for conceiving an idea and then trying to make it true, either by propaganda or sometimes by force.
…While science makes a discovery and then immediately sets about trying to disprove it, just to make sure it’s correct before everybody makes idiots of themselves.” - Seth McFarlane
Religion both suppresses and promotes science, as does Society, Governments and Science itself.
Are you drunk/tired mate? Your grammar has gotten progressively worse throughout the thread. Go to sleep.
N, he's just using his iPad's autocorrect
e: as if to prove my point, nice going autocorrect ^^^
Posted for the awesomeness.
I agree that religion and culture are de facto the same, but they are locked together so tightly that it's incredibly difficult to untangle them.
I know there are some scientists that are religious, I wasn't saying otherwise. You said that 'religion does not suppress science', and it's something that's categorically false. Whether through impeding scientific research or education, there are attempts to suppress it going on all the time.
N, he's just using his iPad's autocorrect
e: as if to prove my point, nice going autocorrect ^^^
Part this and part
Ordered in with next day delivery, so depending when it turns up, I'll either have no ipad, or it'll improve a fair bit.having to lock the screen ton reset digitiser every 10 or so seconds.
No Castiel as usual says it far more elegantly.
If it was religion, then atheists/agnostics wouldn't also be against stem cell and abortion. You really do have to try and separate culture and religion, it's even hard as a lot of organised religions have their core beliefs and then a hell of a lot of culture on top, which do pew not have to be followed and is not central to their belifes.
I'll simply have to say it again.
You said that:
When in actual fact, it does. You said something that is incorrect, untrue, false, whatever you want to call it. It was the opposite of a correct statement.
You said that:
When in actual fact, it does. You said something that is incorrect, untrue, false, whatever you want to call it. It was the opposite of a correct statement.
And a lot of the time not by religion, just as many nutters saying we'll create a black hole, or scared of anything with nuclear in its nam. The point is religion in its purest form does not suppress science. It supports it and needs it. Once you start adding in culture then yes it does surprised.s it. But then t.hats not the religion, it's not the core beliefs and is no different many other groups who suppress t.
Show one religion with a core belief of suppressing science?
You can't they are all cultural beliefs that split religion and citizens as a whole.
Where the shall not meddle in science scripture for Christians.
Take the popes stance
Very suppressing oh wait.
For Gallieo for example you have to look at it in more detail, he had many enemies in the court, it was not by any stretch a pure religious slamming. It was far more complicated than that. Pope Urban fell out with Gallieo in a massive way and was essential in resisting his pardon. Even though he gave permision to publish as long as it was worded as a hypothesis.
Any off that sound like religion and the teaching. Or human nature, hate, control etc.
Last edited:
What he said is also a truth, although not the whole truth. Which is that religion both suppresses and supports Science, the Catholic Church both supported and opposed Copernicus (and to a degree Galileo) for example...but the Catholic Church remains one of the largest single contributors to Science in the world today. The Economist estimated that the American Catholic Church funded American University research programmes to the tune of $48bn in 2010...this doesn't include the $10bn spent on Schools and the $90bn spent on Healthcare which would also include money spent on scientific research in those areas.
The Conflict Thesis is largely dismissed by scientists and historians today, although it seems popular on discussion boards.
No, religion does not suppres science.
People suppress science, fear suppress science.
Show me the doctrine, scripture etc, that suppress science.
Even Gallieo had little to do with religion and everything to do with personal enemies. Only 6 out of 10 sentenced him, he massively fell out with the pope, who once supported him. Is this religion? Or is the actions of men, that could happen in any area of life?
Same with crusades, was it religion?
Or was it land/resource grabbing using the excuse of religion? Just like many other conflicts have used politics, WMD and other reasons to go to war. Is what is citied actually the reason for it? Off course not.
Religion is just one of many groups that empowers people to control subjects, politics is another. Is it religion scriptures saying do this, or the political underpinnings? Off course not, it's human nature, and humans using those.
As I said you have to entangle what is what.if you don't want to untangle it and not look at the underlying reasons, then your right, but do a little digging no scriptures of the religions does not support the actions and the actions are human nature born out in every area of humanly.
You can't say it's the pope so, their for religion is bad.
It's the saying many bad things has been done in the name of religion.
Last edited:
Do the actions of the religious, and/or religious organisations not count, then? I'll make sure that I ask you to remind me who the real religious people are, so I'm not mistakenly thinking that some people are religious, when in actual fact... They are not.
I'd be delighted for you to provide me with an example of a secular organisation trying to ban the teaching of evolution, for example. It's a common, clichéd and easy example of the religious suppressing the education of science. The ban on federal funding for stem cell research was argued on expressly religious grounds. Oh wait, but this doesn't count... Right?
These people aren't real Christians.
I'd be delighted for you to provide me with an example of a secular organisation trying to ban the teaching of evolution, for example. It's a common, clichéd and easy example of the religious suppressing the education of science. The ban on federal funding for stem cell research was argued on expressly religious grounds. Oh wait, but this doesn't count... Right?
These people aren't real Christians.
Last edited:
It has nothing to do with real.
Not everything a person to do is became of thir religion, not everything a religious organisation does is because of the religion. Otherwise they would scrap the hundreds/thousands of years of traditions and go back to the purist of doctrine.
Ok fair enough evolution is strictly religious. So I'm 1% incorrect. But only to people who take the bible literally, which actually is very few. But it's not link their are non religiously groups that h ave successfully shut Dow n atomic reserch etc, or trying to turn off LHC, these few cases are in no way limited to religion.
But most stuff is not religiously, people vastly over estimate how much religiously people ate science or disagree with it most don't.
Also there isn't one religion, manny. Religions are fine with it.
Last edited:
No, it simply looks at one particular truth rather than the broader one. As far as religion in general is concerned it is like any other aspect of human society, it is often in conflict with others and with itself, such is the nature of humanity.
Glaucus is right insofar that it is often the political or cultural aspects of a given society or group (or individual) that determine the actions of the organisation, which is often in conflict with what many within that organisation would actually support. (See ordination of women in the CofE recently). Overall, if we take Islam and Christianity as a whole and look at what they have contributed as well as what they have opposed in regards to scientific endevour and education, it is demonstrable that they ave contributed far more than they have suppressed. Science itself is often in conflict with itself, and has also at times sought to suppress research that is seen to be in opposition to the consensus....it is simply a point of human fallibility.
Oh, I get it. So, when religious organisations and people try to suppress science, they are doing it for non-religious reasons, and somehow that means that 'religion doesn't suppress science'? Your logic is impeccable.
As for the question in the original post, yes. You can believe in god without being religious. What that means is a whole other debate, though.
Well, thanks for making my point. Religion does indeed suppress science, so making the blanket assertion that it does not is incorrect. That's the only point I was making.
Give me your personal view about religion on what you believe please.
Castiel all ready admits he sits on the fence when it comes to religion, very clever actually so he can go either way when some proof comes about on which ever side wins