Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Science and religion

sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
Interesting short read. It's why I don't believe much of what science says anymore about anything. Except for what I can physically test or prove for myself.

"In the modern day and age the scientific method is completely lost on most. Instead, science has become a magic buzzword that represents anything an individual wants it to. Science has become less about fact and more about the desires of the individual. This is best seen in the nonsensical way science is invoked in social media. No matter what question may be asked, there is a "scientific" report (usually nothing more than a survey) that "proves" the answer. This gets applied to everything from relationship advice to favorite meals, clothing choices, moral dilemmas, etc. In this way science is turned into an ideology and even a religion to some (whether they admit it has become their religion or not).

Somewhere along the way the real scientific process has been forgotten by the average person. The phony new version of science that has replaced it has be used to prove everything imaginable. To illustrate this to yourself, pick an argument. Then go to Facebook or Twitter or Google if you"re feeling lazy. Using the search options available on whichever site you choose, you will likely be able to find supposed "scientific" proof for both sides of the argument within 10 minutes. The problem here is that neither will truly use anything remotely close to the scientific method to reach their conclusion.

This loss of scientific knowledge results in a mentally less capable generation, yet we simultaneously see people believing themselves smarter than any generation before them. All over social media we see references to older civilizations as primitive, while our own is deemed "advanced", "intellectual", or somehow more "civilized". Certainly there are many primitive ancient societies, but that does not make our modern one any better. Hate, ignorance, and greed abound in the religious and secular worlds quite equally. Even the idea that the current generation is more civilized is not a new idea; every generation has thought of themselves as more civilized than generations long passed. Many of our predecessors all over the world used this "advanced intellect and civility" as an excuse to enslave, mistreat, or exterminate other cultures. By treating ourselves as a civilized, advanced people, we place ourselves on that very same road.

Sadly this attitude is visible all over social media. Consider an argument many will readily agree with. The argument claims that religion in general is bad. So much so that any religious group should be confronted directly about it. There are typically 2 reasons given for this claim. They are:

Religion leads to fanaticism, which in turn leads to terrorism.
Religion stands in the way of scientific progress.
With the recent actions of Islamic terrorist groups (such as 9/11 and the Paris attacks), people all too readily agree with both of these claims. Yet with very little thought we can see an immediate error in them, while further thought reveals a more insidious problem with this line of thinking.

The first statement made here is clearly wrong, as it shows a poor understanding of fanaticism. If religion leads to fanaticism, then all religious people would inevitably become fanatical. Not all religious people are fanatical, thus religion isn"t the root cause of fanaticism. People can become religious fanatics, certainly, but religion does not directly turn people fanatical. Obsession and refusal to accept another way of life as legitimate lead to fanaticism, and religion is not required for either of these things.

Consider Adolf Hitler, who described himself as an atheist and a Darwinist. Hitler"s idea of progress was removing Jews and Christians from the earth, which he justified by claiming that these groups were preventing the human race from evolving into the superior Aryan race he envisioned. Was Hitler fanatical? Clearly. Was he religious? No. He happily utilized religion to bolster his political career, but once it was no longer necessary he discarded any semblance of religion and sought to remove it from his country as well. This in turn leads us to the next issue with this line of thinking.

The second statement here claims that religion prevents scientific progress. This is clearly a refusal to accept religious ways of life as legitimate, as the statement boils all aspects of religious life down into a single insult. Add to this an obsession with so called "scientific progress" and you have fulfilled both of the requirements needed for fanaticism as described above. It is only a small step from these statements to "religion should be taken out of the way of progress", which in turn leads to violence. This is the more subtle threat inherent in this line of thinking.

The word "progress" itself is dangerous when used alone. Many leaders throughout the ages have made disgusting choices for the sake of "progress". Those who follow this line of thought allow themselves to become far too similar to the tyrants of history.

So we see science becoming a sort of pseudo-ideology that may once have been related to a logical method of study. As this pseudo-ideology gains support we see its adherents become more fanatical about it. These adherents often believe themselves intellectually superior to others in the same way a religious fanatic sees himself as spiritually superior. Thus they justify actions against those deemed inferior; actions we will likely see intensify as time goes on."
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 4:36:54 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
Interesting short read. It's why I don't believe much of what science says anymore about anything. Except for what I can physically test or prove for myself.

"In the modern day and age the scientific method is completely lost on most. Instead, science has become a magic buzzword that represents anything an individual wants it to. Science has become less about fact and more about the desires of the individual. This is best seen in the nonsensical way science is invoked in social media. No matter what question may be asked, there is a "scientific" report (usually nothing more than a survey) that "proves" the answer. This gets applied to everything from relationship advice to favorite meals, clothing choices, moral dilemmas, etc. In this way science is turned into an ideology and even a religion to some (whether they admit it has become their religion or not).

Somewhere along the way the real scientific process has been forgotten by the average person. The phony new version of science that has replaced it has be used to prove everything imaginable. To illustrate this to yourself, pick an argument. Then go to Facebook or Twitter or Google if you"re feeling lazy. Using the search options available on whichever site you choose, you will likely be able to find supposed "scientific" proof for both sides of the argument within 10 minutes. The problem here is that neither will truly use anything remotely close to the scientific method to reach their conclusion.

This loss of scientific knowledge results in a mentally less capable generation, yet we simultaneously see people believing themselves smarter than any generation before them. All over social media we see references to older civilizations as primitive, while our own is deemed "advanced", "intellectual", or somehow more "civilized". Certainly there are many primitive ancient societies, but that does not make our modern one any better. Hate, ignorance, and greed abound in the religious and secular worlds quite equally. Even the idea that the current generation is more civilized is not a new idea; every generation has thought of themselves as more civilized than generations long passed. Many of our predecessors all over the world used this "advanced intellect and civility" as an excuse to enslave, mistreat, or exterminate other cultures. By treating ourselves as a civilized, advanced people, we place ourselves on that very same road.

Sadly this attitude is visible all over social media. Consider an argument many will readily agree with. The argument claims that religion in general is bad. So much so that any religious group should be confronted directly about it. There are typically 2 reasons given for this claim. They are:

Religion leads to fanaticism, which in turn leads to terrorism.
Religion stands in the way of scientific progress.
With the recent actions of Islamic terrorist groups (such as 9/11 and the Paris attacks), people all too readily agree with both of these claims. Yet with very little thought we can see an immediate error in them, while further thought reveals a more insidious problem with this line of thinking.

The first statement made here is clearly wrong, as it shows a poor understanding of fanaticism. If religion leads to fanaticism, then all religious people would inevitably become fanatical. Not all religious people are fanatical, thus religion isn"t the root cause of fanaticism. People can become religious fanatics, certainly, but religion does not directly turn people fanatical. Obsession and refusal to accept another way of life as legitimate lead to fanaticism, and religion is not required for either of these things.

Consider Adolf Hitler, who described himself as an atheist and a Darwinist. Hitler"s idea of progress was removing Jews and Christians from the earth, which he justified by claiming that these groups were preventing the human race from evolving into the superior Aryan race he envisioned. Was Hitler fanatical? Clearly. Was he religious? No. He happily utilized religion to bolster his political career, but once it was no longer necessary he discarded any semblance of religion and sought to remove it from his country as well. This in turn leads us to the next issue with this line of thinking.

The second statement here claims that religion prevents scientific progress. This is clearly a refusal to accept religious ways of life as legitimate, as the statement boils all aspects of religious life down into a single insult. Add to this an obsession with so called "scientific progress" and you have fulfilled both of the requirements needed for fanaticism as described above. It is only a small step from these statements to "religion should be taken out of the way of progress", which in turn leads to violence. This is the more subtle threat inherent in this line of thinking.

The word "progress" itself is dangerous when used alone. Many leaders throughout the ages have made disgusting choices for the sake of "progress". Those who follow this line of thought allow themselves to become far too similar to the tyrants of history.

So we see science becoming a sort of pseudo-ideology that may once have been related to a logical method of study. As this pseudo-ideology gains support we see its adherents become more fanatical about it. These adherents often believe themselves intellectually superior to others in the same way a religious fanatic sees himself as spiritually superior. Thus they justify actions against those deemed inferior; actions we will likely see intensify as time goes on."

You should see how vigorous academic research is
Meh!
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 4:52:44 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
Interesting short read. It's why I don't believe much of what science says anymore about anything. Except for what I can physically test or prove for myself.

"In the modern day and age the scientific method is completely lost on most. Instead, science has become a magic buzzword that represents anything an individual wants it to. Science has become less about fact and more about the desires of the individual. This is best seen in the nonsensical way science is invoked in social media. No matter what question may be asked, there is a "scientific" report (usually nothing more than a survey) that "proves" the answer. This gets applied to everything from relationship advice to favorite meals, clothing choices, moral dilemmas, etc. In this way science is turned into an ideology and even a religion to some (whether they admit it has become their religion or not).

Somewhere along the way the real scientific process has been forgotten by the average person. The phony new version of science that has replaced it has be used to prove everything imaginable. To illustrate this to yourself, pick an argument. Then go to Facebook or Twitter or Google if you"re feeling lazy. Using the search options available on whichever site you choose, you will likely be able to find supposed "scientific" proof for both sides of the argument within 10 minutes. The problem here is that neither will truly use anything remotely close to the scientific method to reach their conclusion.

This loss of scientific knowledge results in a mentally less capable generation, yet we simultaneously see people believing themselves smarter than any generation before them. All over social media we see references to older civilizations as primitive, while our own is deemed "advanced", "intellectual", or somehow more "civilized". Certainly there are many primitive ancient societies, but that does not make our modern one any better. Hate, ignorance, and greed abound in the religious and secular worlds quite equally. Even the idea that the current generation is more civilized is not a new idea; every generation has thought of themselves as more civilized than generations long passed. Many of our predecessors all over the world used this "advanced intellect and civility" as an excuse to enslave, mistreat, or exterminate other cultures. By treating ourselves as a civilized, advanced people, we place ourselves on that very same road.

Sadly this attitude is visible all over social media. Consider an argument many will readily agree with. The argument claims that religion in general is bad. So much so that any religious group should be confronted directly about it. There are typically 2 reasons given for this claim. They are:

Religion leads to fanaticism, which in turn leads to terrorism.
Religion stands in the way of scientific progress.
With the recent actions of Islamic terrorist groups (such as 9/11 and the Paris attacks), people all too readily agree with both of these claims. Yet with very little thought we can see an immediate error in them, while further thought reveals a more insidious problem with this line of thinking.

The first statement made here is clearly wrong, as it shows a poor understanding of fanaticism. If religion leads to fanaticism, then all religious people would inevitably become fanatical. Not all religious people are fanatical, thus religion isn"t the root cause of fanaticism. People can become religious fanatics, certainly, but religion does not directly turn people fanatical. Obsession and refusal to accept another way of life as legitimate lead to fanaticism, and religion is not required for either of these things.

Consider Adolf Hitler, who described himself as an atheist and a Darwinist. Hitler"s idea of progress was removing Jews and Christians from the earth, which he justified by claiming that these groups were preventing the human race from evolving into the superior Aryan race he envisioned. Was Hitler fanatical? Clearly. Was he religious? No. He happily utilized religion to bolster his political career, but once it was no longer necessary he discarded any semblance of religion and sought to remove it from his country as well. This in turn leads us to the next issue with this line of thinking.

The second statement here claims that religion prevents scientific progress. This is clearly a refusal to accept religious ways of life as legitimate, as the statement boils all aspects of religious life down into a single insult. Add to this an obsession with so called "scientific progress" and you have fulfilled both of the requirements needed for fanaticism as described above. It is only a small step from these statements to "religion should be taken out of the way of progress", which in turn leads to violence. This is the more subtle threat inherent in this line of thinking.

The word "progress" itself is dangerous when used alone. Many leaders throughout the ages have made disgusting choices for the sake of "progress". Those who follow this line of thought allow themselves to become far too similar to the tyrants of history.

So we see science becoming a sort of pseudo-ideology that may once have been related to a logical method of study. As this pseudo-ideology gains support we see its adherents become more fanatical about it. These adherents often believe themselves intellectually superior to others in the same way a religious fanatic sees himself as spiritually superior. Thus they justify actions against those deemed inferior; actions we will likely see intensify as time goes on."

So, this is just talking about science in social media. It is silly, if not down right ignorant to ignore real science. Not to mention the author just seems to be ranting.
Meh!
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 6:24:16 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 4:52:44 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
Interesting short read. It's why I don't believe much of what science says anymore about anything. Except for what I can physically test or prove for myself.

"In the modern day and age the scientific method is completely lost on most. Instead, science has become a magic buzzword that represents anything an individual wants it to. Science has become less about fact and more about the desires of the individual. This is best seen in the nonsensical way science is invoked in social media. No matter what question may be asked, there is a "scientific" report (usually nothing more than a survey) that "proves" the answer. This gets applied to everything from relationship advice to favorite meals, clothing choices, moral dilemmas, etc. In this way science is turned into an ideology and even a religion to some (whether they admit it has become their religion or not).

Somewhere along the way the real scientific process has been forgotten by the average person. The phony new version of science that has replaced it has be used to prove everything imaginable. To illustrate this to yourself, pick an argument. Then go to Facebook or Twitter or Google if you"re feeling lazy. Using the search options available on whichever site you choose, you will likely be able to find supposed "scientific" proof for both sides of the argument within 10 minutes. The problem here is that neither will truly use anything remotely close to the scientific method to reach their conclusion.

This loss of scientific knowledge results in a mentally less capable generation, yet we simultaneously see people believing themselves smarter than any generation before them. All over social media we see references to older civilizations as primitive, while our own is deemed "advanced", "intellectual", or somehow more "civilized". Certainly there are many primitive ancient societies, but that does not make our modern one any better. Hate, ignorance, and greed abound in the religious and secular worlds quite equally. Even the idea that the current generation is more civilized is not a new idea; every generation has thought of themselves as more civilized than generations long passed. Many of our predecessors all over the world used this "advanced intellect and civility" as an excuse to enslave, mistreat, or exterminate other cultures. By treating ourselves as a civilized, advanced people, we place ourselves on that very same road.

Sadly this attitude is visible all over social media. Consider an argument many will readily agree with. The argument claims that religion in general is bad. So much so that any religious group should be confronted directly about it. There are typically 2 reasons given for this claim. They are:

Religion leads to fanaticism, which in turn leads to terrorism.
Religion stands in the way of scientific progress.
With the recent actions of Islamic terrorist groups (such as 9/11 and the Paris attacks), people all too readily agree with both of these claims. Yet with very little thought we can see an immediate error in them, while further thought reveals a more insidious problem with this line of thinking.

The first statement made here is clearly wrong, as it shows a poor understanding of fanaticism. If religion leads to fanaticism, then all religious people would inevitably become fanatical. Not all religious people are fanatical, thus religion isn"t the root cause of fanaticism. People can become religious fanatics, certainly, but religion does not directly turn people fanatical. Obsession and refusal to accept another way of life as legitimate lead to fanaticism, and religion is not required for either of these things.

Consider Adolf Hitler, who described himself as an atheist and a Darwinist. Hitler"s idea of progress was removing Jews and Christians from the earth, which he justified by claiming that these groups were preventing the human race from evolving into the superior Aryan race he envisioned. Was Hitler fanatical? Clearly. Was he religious? No. He happily utilized religion to bolster his political career, but once it was no longer necessary he discarded any semblance of religion and sought to remove it from his country as well. This in turn leads us to the next issue with this line of thinking.

The second statement here claims that religion prevents scientific progress. This is clearly a refusal to accept religious ways of life as legitimate, as the statement boils all aspects of religious life down into a single insult. Add to this an obsession with so called "scientific progress" and you have fulfilled both of the requirements needed for fanaticism as described above. It is only a small step from these statements to "religion should be taken out of the way of progress", which in turn leads to violence. This is the more subtle threat inherent in this line of thinking.

The word "progress" itself is dangerous when used alone. Many leaders throughout the ages have made disgusting choices for the sake of "progress". Those who follow this line of thought allow themselves to become far too similar to the tyrants of history.

So we see science becoming a sort of pseudo-ideology that may once have been related to a logical method of study. As this pseudo-ideology gains support we see its adherents become more fanatical about it. These adherents often believe themselves intellectually superior to others in the same way a religious fanatic sees himself as spiritually superior. Thus they justify actions against those deemed inferior; actions we will likely see intensify as time goes on."

So, this is just talking about science in social media. It is silly, if not down right ignorant to ignore real science. Not to mention the author just seems to be ranting.

I see you joined 2 weeks ago Axonly, Well that sadolite bloke is without a doubt the wisest person on this site , fair enough if you don't agree that he is or with his thoughts, but your going to need more then 2 lines to discredit it and make your claim. Little tip.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 11:27:31 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
This loss of scientific knowledge results in a mentally less capable generation, yet we simultaneously see people believing themselves smarter than any generation before them.
If religion leads to fanaticism, then all religious people would inevitably become fanatical. Not all religious people are fanatical, thus religion isn"t the root cause of fanaticism.
Does anyone else find it ironic that this argument is philosophical, rather than scientific?

Smoking leads to lung cancer, yet not all people who smoke get lung-cancer -- scientific empiricism
Religion cannot lead to fanaticism because not all religious become fanatics -- philosophical logic

Loss of scientific knowledge leads to... what again?
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 5:51:36 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
Interesting short read. It's why I don't believe much of what science says anymore about anything. Except for what I can physically test or prove for myself.

Sorry, what in there makes you not want to believe much of what science says? You see folks misinterpret scientific research, and therefore you disbelieve the research? That sounds like a pretty unreasonable reaction.
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 5:58:52 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 11:27:31 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
This loss of scientific knowledge results in a mentally less capable generation, yet we simultaneously see people believing themselves smarter than any generation before them.
If religion leads to fanaticism, then all religious people would inevitably become fanatical. Not all religious people are fanatical, thus religion isn"t the root cause of fanaticism.
Does anyone else find it ironic that this argument is philosophical, rather than scientific?

Smoking leads to lung cancer, yet not all people who smoke get lung-cancer -- scientific empiricism
Religion cannot lead to fanaticism because not all religious become fanatics -- philosophical logic

Loss of scientific knowledge leads to... what again?

I don't know if irony is the word for it, but the OP's source, while attempting to defend religion as not a source of fanatics, seems to not understand the consequences of religious thought. It says religion doesn't lead to fanaticism, but rather that "obsession and refusal to accept another way of life as legitimate lead to fanaticism, and religion is not required for either of these things." Well what the hell does he/she think religion breeds? When you say "an all-power, all-knowing being that created everything says this is how you are supposed to live," no right-minded person could possibly think that would lead to anything other than obsession and refusal to accept another way of life. So, no, religion isn't required for those things, but it's one of the easiest routes to them.
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2016 6:39:08 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 4:52:44 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
Interesting short read. It's why I don't believe much of what science says anymore about anything. Except for what I can physically test or prove for myself.

"In the modern day and age the scientific method is completely lost on most. Instead, science has become a magic buzzword that represents anything an individual wants it to. Science has become less about fact and more about the desires of the individual. This is best seen in the nonsensical way science is invoked in social media. No matter what question may be asked, there is a "scientific" report (usually nothing more than a survey) that "proves" the answer. This gets applied to everything from relationship advice to favorite meals, clothing choices, moral dilemmas, etc. In this way science is turned into an ideology and even a religion to some (whether they admit it has become their religion or not).

Somewhere along the way the real scientific process has been forgotten by the average person. The phony new version of science that has replaced it has be used to prove everything imaginable. To illustrate this to yourself, pick an argument. Then go to Facebook or Twitter or Google if you"re feeling lazy. Using the search options available on whichever site you choose, you will likely be able to find supposed "scientific" proof for both sides of the argument within 10 minutes. The problem here is that neither will truly use anything remotely close to the scientific method to reach their conclusion.

This loss of scientific knowledge results in a mentally less capable generation, yet we simultaneously see people believing themselves smarter than any generation before them. All over social media we see references to older civilizations as primitive, while our own is deemed "advanced", "intellectual", or somehow more "civilized". Certainly there are many primitive ancient societies, but that does not make our modern one any better. Hate, ignorance, and greed abound in the religious and secular worlds quite equally. Even the idea that the current generation is more civilized is not a new idea; every generation has thought of themselves as more civilized than generations long passed. Many of our predecessors all over the world used this "advanced intellect and civility" as an excuse to enslave, mistreat, or exterminate other cultures. By treating ourselves as a civilized, advanced people, we place ourselves on that very same road.

Sadly this attitude is visible all over social media. Consider an argument many will readily agree with. The argument claims that religion in general is bad. So much so that any religious group should be confronted directly about it. There are typically 2 reasons given for this claim. They are:

Religion leads to fanaticism, which in turn leads to terrorism.
Religion stands in the way of scientific progress.
With the recent actions of Islamic terrorist groups (such as 9/11 and the Paris attacks), people all too readily agree with both of these claims. Yet with very little thought we can see an immediate error in them, while further thought reveals a more insidious problem with this line of thinking.

The first statement made here is clearly wrong, as it shows a poor understanding of fanaticism. If religion leads to fanaticism, then all religious people would inevitably become fanatical. Not all religious people are fanatical, thus religion isn"t the root cause of fanaticism. People can become religious fanatics, certainly, but religion does not directly turn people fanatical. Obsession and refusal to accept another way of life as legitimate lead to fanaticism, and religion is not required for either of these things.

Consider Adolf Hitler, who described himself as an atheist and a Darwinist. Hitler"s idea of progress was removing Jews and Christians from the earth, which he justified by claiming that these groups were preventing the human race from evolving into the superior Aryan race he envisioned. Was Hitler fanatical? Clearly. Was he religious? No. He happily utilized religion to bolster his political career, but once it was no longer necessary he discarded any semblance of religion and sought to remove it from his country as well. This in turn leads us to the next issue with this line of thinking.

The second statement here claims that religion prevents scientific progress. This is clearly a refusal to accept religious ways of life as legitimate, as the statement boils all aspects of religious life down into a single insult. Add to this an obsession with so called "scientific progress" and you have fulfilled both of the requirements needed for fanaticism as described above. It is only a small step from these statements to "religion should be taken out of the way of progress", which in turn leads to violence. This is the more subtle threat inherent in this line of thinking.

The word "progress" itself is dangerous when used alone. Many leaders throughout the ages have made disgusting choices for the sake of "progress". Those who follow this line of thought allow themselves to become far too similar to the tyrants of history.

So we see science becoming a sort of pseudo-ideology that may once have been related to a logical method of study. As this pseudo-ideology gains support we see its adherents become more fanatical about it. These adherents often believe themselves intellectually superior to others in the same way a religious fanatic sees himself as spiritually superior. Thus they justify actions against those deemed inferior; actions we will likely see intensify as time goes on."

So, this is just talking about science in social media. It is silly, if not down right ignorant to ignore real science. Not to mention the author just seems to be ranting.

+1
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2016 6:46:41 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 11:27:31 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
This loss of scientific knowledge results in a mentally less capable generation, yet we simultaneously see people believing themselves smarter than any generation before them.
If religion leads to fanaticism, then all religious people would inevitably become fanatical. Not all religious people are fanatical, thus religion isn"t the root cause of fanaticism.
Does anyone else find it ironic that this argument is philosophical, rather than scientific?

Smoking leads to lung cancer, yet not all people who smoke get lung-cancer -- scientific empiricism
Religion cannot lead to fanaticism because not all religious become fanatics -- philosophical logic
News for you, neither does his drivel qualify as philosophy. This "logic" is neither sound, nor valid.
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/19/2016 6:56:21 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:40:07 AM, sadolite wrote:
Interesting short read. It's why I don't believe much of what science says anymore about anything. Except for what I can physically test or prove for myself.

"In the modern day and age the scientific method is completely lost on most. Instead, science has become a magic buzzword that represents anything an individual wants it to. Science has become less about fact and more about the desires of the individual. This is best seen in the nonsensical way science is invoked in social media. No matter what question may be asked, there is a "scientific" report (usually nothing more than a survey) that "proves" the answer. This gets applied to everything from relationship advice to favorite meals, clothing choices, moral dilemmas, etc. In this way science is turned into an ideology and even a religion to some (whether they admit it has become their religion or not).
Which is why I don't like (in the Facebook sense) the likes of 8fact, and sometimes criticise media reports on scientific studies. That, however, is not sufficient to justify your general attitude towards science, which you have repeatedly elaborated on this site, such as trusting anecdotal evidence over statistical evidence.
Somewhere along the way the real scientific process has been forgotten by the average person. The phony new version of science that has replaced it has be used to prove everything imaginable. To illustrate this to yourself, pick an argument. Then go to Facebook or Twitter or Google if you"re feeling lazy. Using the search options available on whichever site you choose, you will likely be able to find supposed "scientific" proof for both sides of the argument within 10 minutes. The problem here is that neither will truly use anything remotely close to the scientific method to reach their conclusion.
True, and there is often a lot of p=0.05 abuse on both sides. It doesn't mean that science is useless, however; it only means that we should learn how to better interpret these data.
This loss of scientific knowledge results in a mentally less capable generation, yet we simultaneously see people believing themselves smarter than any generation before them. All over social media we see references to older civilizations as primitive, while our own is deemed "advanced", "intellectual", or somehow more "civilized". Certainly there are many primitive ancient societies, but that does not make our modern one any better. Hate, ignorance, and greed abound in the religious and secular worlds quite equally. Even the idea that the current generation is more civilized is not a new idea; every generation has thought of themselves as more civilized than generations long passed. Many of our predecessors all over the world used this "advanced intellect and civility" as an excuse to enslave, mistreat, or exterminate other cultures. By treating ourselves as a civilized, advanced people, we place ourselves on that very same road.
I'm not sure how this undermines the value of science.
Sadly this attitude is visible all over social media. Consider an argument many will readily agree with. The argument claims that religion in general is bad. So much so that any religious group should be confronted directly about it. There are typically 2 reasons given for this claim. They are:

Religion leads to fanaticism, which in turn leads to terrorism.
Religion stands in the way of scientific progress.
With the recent actions of Islamic terrorist groups (such as 9/11 and the Paris attacks), people all too readily agree with both of these claims. Yet with very little thought we can see an immediate error in them, while further thought reveals a more insidious problem with this line of thinking.

The first statement made here is clearly wrong, as it shows a poor understanding of fanaticism. If religion leads to fanaticism, then all religious people would inevitably become fanatical. Not all religious people are fanatical, thus religion isn"t the root cause of fanaticism. People can become religious fanatics, certainly, but religion does not directly turn people fanatical. Obsession and refusal to accept another way of life as legitimate lead to fanaticism, and religion is not required for either of these things.

Consider Adolf Hitler, who described himself as an atheist and a Darwinist. Hitler"s idea of progress was removing Jews and Christians from the earth, which he justified by claiming that these groups were preventing the human race from evolving into the superior Aryan race he envisioned. Was Hitler fanatical? Clearly. Was he religious? No. He happily utilized religion to bolster his political career, but once it was no longer necessary he discarded any semblance of religion and sought to remove it from his country as well. This in turn leads us to the next issue with this line of thinking.
All this is true but still doesn't refute science in any way.
The second statement here claims that religion prevents scientific progress. This is clearly a refusal to accept religious ways of life as legitimate, as the statement boils all aspects of religious life down into a single insult. Add to this an obsession with so called "scientific progress" and you have fulfilled both of the requirements needed for fanaticism as described above. It is only a small step from these statements to "religion should be taken out of the way of progress", which in turn leads to violence. This is the more subtle threat inherent in this line of thinking.
Science alone isn't justification to eradicate religion; however, when people reject well-established scientific evidence in the name of religion, as in young earth creationism or refusal to believe in a heliocentric solar system, it creates a problem.
The word "progress" itself is dangerous when used alone. Many leaders throughout the ages have made disgusting choices for the sake of "progress". Those who follow this line of thought allow themselves to become far too similar to the tyrants of history.

So we see science becoming a sort of pseudo-ideology that may once have been related to a logical method of study. As this pseudo-ideology gains support we see its adherents become more fanatical about it. These adherents often believe themselves intellectually superior to others in the same way a religious fanatic sees himself as spiritually superior. Thus they justify actions against those deemed inferior; actions we will likely see intensify as time goes on."
Rather than denigrating the value of science and the pro-science movement, shouldn't we instead work on promoting scientific literacy (such as teaching Popper, Kuhn, statistical methods, experiment design, etc.)?
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...