Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SniHjen]

Magnets... How do they work? And fifthed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMFPe-DwULM

<3 Feynman

THIS IS NOW A FEYNMAN THREAD!

[Zrk2]

Here's how it is, Religion in and of itself does not technicly interfere with Science, it does not help or hinder it. But PEOPLE use religion to go against science, to keep the status quo to keep their control over the general populas.
In short, Religion = Not a problem, People who lead religions = A problem.

That was about what I was going to say, only in an uncouth fashion. Thank you.

NINJAS x2

[ed boy]

In short, Religion = Not a problem, People who lead religions = A problem.

Not quite right. It should be:

In short, Religion = Not a problem, People who lead religions = Potentially a problem.

[KaguroDraven]

Point, some people just honestly have faith in said religion, but others just try to get positions of power....well to get a position of power.

[Leafsnail]

Well, there are some instances where "honestly having faith" can also cause a problem, depending on what that faith means to you...

[Christes]

Magnets... How do they work? And fifthed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMFPe-DwULM

<3 Feynman

THIS IS NOW A FEYNMAN THREAD!

Get that man some orange juice

[Sowelu]

Religion isn't anti-science.  Some religious people are anti-science.  They would probably be like that anyway.  The only place that religion truly enters into it is when scientific advancements require a modification in morality, or at least requires us to start thinking about moral issues we didn't think about before.

Yeah I like Nikov's quote.  Someone who respects God should respect him as an artist and seek to learn more about how and why.  You don't hear people saying "Da Vinci was brilliant, I'd better not examine his work".

Anyway yeah, (very) historically, religion has been a huge driving force in science.  Partly just because the priest caste in almost every culture had shitloads of time on their hands.

[Glowcat]

Religion isn't anti-science.  Some religious people are anti-science.

You have this entirely wrong.

Religion denies science and embraces faith. Some religious people do not use faith when pursuing knowledge.

Progress is possible whenever people don't get emotional hang-ups that drive them to believe one thing despite all evidence and reasoning saying otherwise.
Religion, unfortunately, can be one of those hang-ups... depending on circumstances surrounding the person and the prospect in question. India, for example, is both incredibly superstitious while also readily accepting of scientific advancements except in cases where those advancements say something like "No, the guru can't create a magic anti-nuke shield."

[Willfor]

Progress is possible whenever people don't get emotional hang-ups that drive them to believe one thing despite all evidence and reasoning saying otherwise.
Religion, unfortunately, can be one of those hang-ups... depending on circumstances surrounding the person and the prospect in question. India, for example, is both incredibly superstitious while also readily accepting of scientific advancements except in cases where those advancements say something like "No, the guru can't create a magic anti-nuke shield."

I'd like a source on that last point, because that sounds to me like a fringe belief and not a mainstream one.

And if you are getting things like that confused like you seem to be in the rest of your post, well, :')

[freeformschooler]

I second Bauglir. I'm an Agnostic, go to an agnostic "church" and while we have faith in all our own religions as we worship I'm sure there would be very few people in my "church" they would be against being scientists or whatever tickles their fancy.

As much as I'd like to believe religion and science incompatible, I think it's really that specific interpretations of religion and science tend to be incompatible. For instance: take the bible thumpin' baptist fundamentalists sects that believe that science is the root of all evil. I used to go to a whole church like that (before I got away and became less stupid). But then you might have more liberal religious sects who encourage science to help us understand what supposedly God or whoever it was created.

I definitely don't want to be scientifically stupid. And I don't believe that my religion hinders that goal. If I acted on specific interpretations of religious word, it might.

[Glowcat]

I'd like a source on that last point, because that sounds to me like a fringe belief and not a mainstream one.

And if you are getting things like that confused like you seem to be in the rest of your post, well, :')

My understanding of India's situation comes from:

http://newhumanist.org.uk/2500/the-god-confusion

The nuke thing is, afaik, a fringe belief and my point was more about general acceptance of supernatural explanations/guidance than the prevalence of a particular wacky belief.

[Willfor]

You have this entirely wrong.

Religion denies science and embraces faith. Some religious people do not use faith when pursuing knowledge.

Progress is possible whenever people don't get emotional hang-ups that drive them to believe one thing despite all evidence and reasoning saying otherwise.
Religion, unfortunately, can be one of those hang-ups... depending on circumstances surrounding the person and the prospect in question. India, for example, is both incredibly superstitious while also readily accepting of scientific advancements except in cases where those advancements say something like "No, the guru can't create a magic anti-nuke shield."

The nuke thing is, afaik, a fringe belief and my point was more about general acceptance of supernatural explanations/guidance than the prevalence of a particular wacky belief.

I'm only pointing it out because you used a fringe case to illustrate your beef with a great majority, as if everyone was like the fringe. There are hundreds of better examples from the mainstream if your beef is with them that you don't have to go digging through the least applicable examples to make your point.

If you're attempting hyperbole, you should make it more clear so people don't think everyone in India is a backwards anti-science religious extremist.

[Grimlocke]

While it may be possible for a single person to adhere both science and a religion, I am cetain that religion on a larger scale is detrimental to scientific progress.

Anyone educated with a mindset that accepts facts without proof or reason will be far less likely to persue a scientific career, or accept solutions provided by science. Not to mention that many religious groups are outright hostile toward science.

[Willfor]

Anyone educated with a mindset that accepts facts without proof or reason will be far less likely to persue a scientific career.

Huh.

Not to mention that many religious groups are outright hostile toward science.

How many? Can you be specific which ones or do you believe it's all of them? What kind of a ratio are we talking about here?

A list would be nice. I do not want to accept your facts without reason or proof, after all.

[Duke 2.0]

 Interesting how these threads have reasonable, peaceful and overall nice answers that try to bring humanity together in the first few pages that quickly dive down into hostilities when accusations of one side being completely wrong and outright harmful to everyone.