The Instigator
mcnugget
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Orose_Khan
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Without religion humans would be much more scientificaly advanced.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/4/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 377 times Debate No: 90674
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

mcnugget

Pro

The first round will be a simple introduction. The next three will be presentation of your argument. good luck to who ever challenges I hope for a good debate.
Orose_Khan

Con

Hello, I accept the challenge.

I will begin by stating my substantives which I will elaborate on in the later rounds.

1) Religion and Science coexist. They do not compete. (counter-policy)
2) More preparation time does not necessarily mean better results.
3) Religion and Science can sometimes support each other.

Hope to have a good debate.
Debate Round No. 1
mcnugget

Pro

I depends what religion you are speaking of when you say they can co exist. The bible specifically in the book of genesis goes against many laws of physics and is extremely out dated as the bible said the universe is 6000 years old and everything was made over the course of 6 days. genesis 1:1-31. Back to the original topic free thought was resisted greatly in the middle ages and many scientist were burned to the stake by Christians and Muslims alike. most scientist discontinued their work in fear of being killed. For thousands of year people have been simply focused on getting into heaven and have neglected growth of scientific progress and the benefits that come with it. Even religion that did not discourage free thought set the human race back by doing what there priest told them to instead of helping society. This leads me to the corrupt catholic church. The church was almost more powerful that the government during the middle ages because what ever they said to do everyone did including giving large amounts of the money they had to the church so a relative or friend could go to heaven. Explain to me how science and religion would support each other and you are right that we don't know if we would be better off but technological advancement would have certainly gone quicker without religion pulling it back.
Orose_Khan

Con

Rebuttals:
"The bible specifically in the book of genesis goes against many laws of physics and is extremely out dated as the bible said the universe is 6000 years old and everything was made over the course of 6 days."

By saying that the book of genesis goes against the laws of physics you are referring to the law of conversation of energy, correct?

I shall begin by stating that our theoretical creator deity predates the universe and hence is not bound by its laws. All the laws of science were already in place when discovered by Newton, Einstein and all the great minds. However, they are to our deity what a code of conduct is to us. To our deity, these laws that exist are intangible and do not exist as absolutes. Without this theory, the law of conversation states that the universe would not or does not exist as it was predated by nothing.

"Even religion that did not discourage free thought set the human race back by doing what there priest told them to instead of helping society."

Historically, humans themselves tend to reject new concepts (http://phys.org...) not simply because they are told to but because of an inherent biasness against the unfamiliar. For example, really young kids (3-6 I think?) would probably get defensive if you told them something that opposes their fundamental beliefs.

"For thousands of year people have been simply focused on getting into heaven and have neglected growth of scientific progress and the benefits that come with it."

Not true, the inhabitants of ancient Greece and Mesopotamia struck a balance between "thinking" and religion. Both civilisations are considered ahead of their time even though they were deeply religious.

https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...

"The church was almost more powerful that the government during the middle ages because what ever they said to do everyone did including giving large amounts of the money they had to the church so a relative or friend could go to heaven."

The Middle Ages was a time of Monarchy. I would sooner attribute the ignorance of the era to egotism in the aristocracy than anything else. It was the aristocracy that opposed the education of the serfs as seen here: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...

My argument:

As mentioned earlier, Religion and Science coexist. Religion exists for 2 main reasons. To follow a doctrine of ethical conduct and to pay respect to our theoretical creator. Science exists for a completely different reason which is to gain knowledge of our universe and to apply that knowledge. The fact that religion and science exist for different reasons substantiates my proposal that they coexist.

The reason why these things clash is due to the machinations of Mankind. Religious text is an interpretation made by man of the religious doctrine and the history surrounding that doctrine. As it is an interpretation by Man, it can be subject to distortion or sabotage. Devotees of that religion, not knowing better, then opt to follow that text. Likewise, it is the corrupt nature of certain individuals and the gullibility of the remaining population that causes religion to hamper things like scientific development.

A prime example of an age where religion and science do not clash is the renaissance otherwise known as the "age of enlightenment". It was a time when the church was still a powerful organisation and the rate of scientific development started to accelerate, eventually blossoming into the Industrial Revolution of Europe. Instances such as Galileo Galilei's dispute with the church over the cosmic placement of the planet do not oppose my point. As stated earlier, the reason for this is due to the distortion of the religion and not the presence of religion itself.

In conclusion, religion in its purest form coexists with science. It is the distortion of said religion by humans that results in any clash. For these reasons, I am proud to oppose.
Debate Round No. 2
mcnugget

Pro

mcnugget forfeited this round.
Orose_Khan

Con

Orose_Khan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
mcnugget

Pro

mcnugget forfeited this round.
Orose_Khan

Con

Orose_Khan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by elikakohen 9 months ago
elikakohen
It's a shame this debate expired. It would have been great to see this develop. However, I am bit frustrated to see the round two arguments relying on misrepresentations of religious texts. Either way - I hope to see a fresh version of this!
Posted by canis 9 months ago
canis
Yes..Sciense would. But humans can not advance. That would probably be a matter of 10-500.000 years. Advancement is a selective proces, that can as easely leed to degeneration/exstintion...That is evolution.
No votes have been placed for this debate.