Has science made religion useless?

[T_aquaticus]

@Ashwin_s

According to you, what is an “open” human society?

In general:

Liberal democracy is a liberal political ideology and a form of government in which representative democracy operates under the principles of classical liberalism. Also referred to as Western democracy, it is characterised by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people. To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either codified, (such as in the United States of America[1]), or uncodified, (such as in the United Kingdom) to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of sustained expansion throughout the 20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in the world.
Liberal democracy - Wikipedia.

@Ashwin_s

Reality is that religion is immensely useful in most societies in the world including in America.

Would you agree that fantasies can also be useful in the same way?

[Ashwin_s]

@T_aquaticus

In general:

I think democracies are the best form of government accessible to human beings…

@T_aquaticus

Would you agree that fantasies can also be useful in the same way?

I dont about whether it would be the same way.

But fantasies have their use… I am sure Jerry Coyne must take some comfort from the idea that religions have been made useless by science. Maybe it helps him sleep better.

So ya, fantasies also can be useful in some cases.

[Patrick]

@Ashwin_s

Except for some people in Europe and a minority in the US who think differently and have the gumption to say things like religion are “useless”.

I’ll go one step further and say all religions are dangerous and an impediment to humanity.

[AllenWitmerMiller (Retired Professor & Minister.)]

@Patrick

I’ll go one step further and say all religions are dangerous and an impediment to humanity.

I’ll go one step further beyond that and say that all humanity is dangerous and an impediment to humans in general. (That can also be an impediment to religions but I’m mostly concerned about humanity tending to be dangerous to other humans. Humans have a very a long track record of being dangerous.)

I’m not trying to be flippant. Humans tend to be the greater danger.

[Puck_Mendelssohn]

@AllenWitmerMiller

I’ll go one step further beyond that and say that all humanity is dangerous and an impediment to humans in general.

I think that’s fair. And I’d agree with Patrick but I do know a few people whose great work for others has been motivated, at least in some part, by their religious views so while I think that religion is by and large a negative force, it does have its positive manifestations. Religion, like people, is complicated. And dangerous as all hell.

[Ashwin_s]

@Patrick

I’ll go one step further and say all religions are dangerous and an impediment to humanity.

Good for you…
Just dont expect too many people to agree with you and follow in your footsteps.

@Puck_Mendelssohn

Religion, like people, is complicated. And dangerous as all hell.

I think @AllenWitmerMiller is trying to say that religion tends to be dangerous because people are dangerous. We make everything that we touch dangerous.
And this is more true of science because of the possible scope for destruction. Dont forget about nukes, bioweapons, global warming etc.
People can kill each other over religion, land etc… science and technology has enabled us to take violence to a whole different level. We can now kill the entire planet.
Does that make science and technology harmful?

[Puck_Mendelssohn]

@Ashwin_s

Does that make science and technology harmful?

It makes them dangerous. I don’t think anyone denies that science and technology are both dangerous AND of great benefit to humankind. So, do we head into that age made more dark by the lights of perverted science, e.g., Intelligent Design Creationism, or do we decline to pervert science for religious (or other odious) ends?

[Ashwin_s]

@Puck_Mendelssohn

. So, do we head into that age made more dark by the lights of perverted science, e.g., Intelligent Design Creationism, or do we decline to pervert science for religious (or other odious) ends?

This is question begging and really has little to do with the question we are discussing.
If Kim Jong un wants to use physics to create a hydrogen bomb and a missile to carry it to my backyard… is he planning to “pervert science”?

Of course not… the perversion originates in his motives and has nothing to do with science. But the science is “good” science.

Science is a method… people can use it or refuse to use it… You can’t really “pervert” methods…
And if scientists are clear in defining good methodology and enforce that standard, they dont have to worry about the method being perverted.

[Giltil (Gilbert Thill)]

@T_aquaticus

If I want to understand what causes cancer, is religion useful?

No

@T_aquaticus

If I want to understand why racism is bad, is science useful?

Are you aware that evolutionary science has historically played a strong role to promote racism?

@T_aquaticus

For that matter, is religion useful?

For religions claiming that all men an women are created at the image of God, yes, absolutely.

[Roy (30-year veteran)]

@Giltil

@T_aquaticus

If I want to understand why racism is bad, is science useful?

Are you aware that evolutionary science has historically played a strong role to promote racism?

I’m aware that racists have misused evolutionary science to promote their pre-existing views, but that misuse is groundless and unsupported by the actual theory and details.

I’m also aware that religion has actually played a role in promoting racism, rather than merely being distorted. Hamites vs Japhethites and Nephites vs Lamanites come to mind.

@T_aquaticus

For that matter, is religion useful?

For religions claiming that all men an women are created at the image of God, yes, absolutely.

How is that useful? You didn’t say.

[Giltil (Gilbert Thill)]

@Roy

How is that useful? You didn’t say.

I was answering the following question by @T_aquaticus: if I want to understand why racism is bad, is religion useful?

[T_aquaticus]

@Giltil

Are you aware that evolutionary science has historically played a strong role to promote racism?

No, I wasn’t aware. What science demonstrates that certain groups of people have less human value than others? What science supports discrimination based on the levels of melanin in peoples’ skin?

@Giltil

For religions claiming that all men an women are created at the image of God, yes, absolutely.

Then why do I find scriptures in the Bible that support slavery?

[Rumraket (Mikkel R.)]

@Giltil

if I want to understand why racism is bad, is religion useful?

Not any more than innumerable other forms of social and philosophical beliefs.

By the way, this talking point about evolution and racism seems to be nothing but some stick you pick up to beat evolution with on some occasion here and there. Tell me more about your history of combating racist policies. What parties do you vote for? Where do you live? What politicians do you vote for? What’s your opinion on the black lives matter movement? Please don’t tell me you’re usually voting conservative republicans, and are merely paying lip-service to the idea of anti-racist policies when rhetorically convenient for you, but when it comes down to it at the ballot box your concern for mistreatment of minorities mysteriously disappears.

@Giltil

For religions claiming that all men an women are created at the image of God, yes, absolutely.

That says nothing about racism. Incidentally women, being created in the image of God, are told to shut up in church. Created intrinsically worse and for the convenience of men. In the image of God, but apparently less so.

[Puck_Mendelssohn]

@Ashwin_s

You can’t really “pervert” methods…

Can’t you? The ID Creationists are certainly trying very hard to do it. I don’t think that when Churchill coined that expression he meant that “perverted science” was good science turned to bad purposes, but that he meant things similar to ID Creationism, like German racial pseudoscience.

[Ashwin_s]

@Puck_Mendelssohn

Can’t you?

The next few sentences in my reply answers this question.

[Puck_Mendelssohn]

@Ashwin_s

The next few sentences in my reply answers this question.

Right, and I understand your answer. It remains the case that people like the ID Creationists are constantly trying to pervert science to their own ends. The purity of science from these types of perversions isn’t automatic: it requires eternal vigilance.

[Patrick]

@Ashwin_s

Good for you…
Just dont expect too many people to agree with you and follow in your footsteps.

Actually a lot of people are following in my footsteps. In Europe, Austrialia, Canada, secularism is predominate. In the US, a third of the population have no religious affiliation and nearly half of those under 45 have no religious affiliation. And during this worldwide COVID pandemic, religions all over the world has shown their total uselessness. It is only through science, human reasoning, empathy and cooperation that this global pandemic will be conquered. Religions have just gotten in the way and added to, and not lessened the human suffering.

[Ashwin_s]

@Puck_Mendelssohn

The purity of science from these types of perversions isn’t automatic: it requires eternal vigilance.

Ya so what?
Same applies to any enterprise. Nearly every field has quality checks and failsafes against malpractice.

I am all for strengthening science w.r.t to quality/protection from malpractice.

You are talking almost in religious terms here… beware of the apostate who perverts science!
He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing etc…
Let’s keep the purity of THE science…

This is a little weird.

[Puck_Mendelssohn]

@Ashwin_s

This is a little weird.

It only is weird if what is meant by it is weird. In my case, I am not a scientist myself and am simply concerned that science as we know it today continues to maintain its integrity and is not taken over by political movements run by religious zealots and the like.

In America, this is a close-run bit of business, and if the Kitzmiller decision on Intelligent Design had gone otherwise we’d be having a lively fight here over keeping scientific perversity away from our children. Fortunately, the decision went the right way and the integrity of science against that particular assault is intact. But there will be more such attacks.

[Puck_Mendelssohn]

@Patrick

In the US, a third of the population have no religious affiliation and nearly half of those under 45 have no religious affiliation.

Culturally, we’re lagging Western Europe, but we are catching up! I think that Donald Trump may actually be aiding the cause – certainly the McFlightsuit administration was not good for religion’s reputation with young people.