Is religion any use if science can supply answers?

  • This quote explains it all

    "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

    Supposedly said by Albert Einstein, it means that without religion science isn't as strong without religion. There are Christian scientists *gasp* and they believe science just explains how God created the universe, people, life etc. instead of the bible. Deal with it.

  • "MORE SO" than science.

    Has science answered the questions of religion? No. There have been an innumerable amount of religions throughout history, many of which may be long lost to our society's present knowledge. Furthermore, to say that science has even strengthened the case for religion not being a reality isn't necessarily the case. Is this statement ignorant? Hardly. Rather, its merely an observation that, while science may say one thing against a particular aspect of a particular religion, its only in the case that people are understanding that aspect of that religion to be interpreted the way that they interpret it. Meanwhile, that particular aspect may have many interpretations. In the case of Christianity, science mainly attacks only the first few chapters out of the 1,189 chapters in the Bible. Meanwhile, even those chapters haven't been completely refuted... because there can be many interpretations of those chapters. Perhaps even interpretations by people from before science started supposedly refuting them.

    Posted by: JonK
  • Yes, religion supplies emotional support to science's logic

    Religion is useful because it appeals to the emotional side of humanity. While science is useful for discovery and explanation, it sometimes needs that emotional or moral lens to correctly use the new technology or discovery. Religion still holds some power in terms of morals (albeit sometimes they are skewed) but it is helpful in providing people a more comforting point from which to approach science until society moves forward.

  • Yes, religion has a use

    Many people feel that religion is inadequate because it cannot be materially proven. Religion, however, is not based on material reality, but a philosophical reality. It is the simple, logical relationship that is inferred from material reality, but also moral reality. Many people easily accept that the sensations they experience through their eyes and feel with their skin are sufficient to prove an objective morality, just not a spiritual reality. Even if science gave us all the answers about tangible reality, it would not give the answers about moral and spiritual reality.

  • Religion is still significant.

    Even though there are many things that science can prove, there are some acts of God that can't be logically explained. Storms like Hurricanes Sandy and Katrina are examples of this. There are other historical events and structures like Noah's Ark and the Creation that are recorded in the Bible and accepted as religious truths. However, there is scientific research that supports these Biblical stories. So, in many instances, science and religion work together to answer probing historical questions.

  • Nope.

    Over time religions have changed as the predictive capabilities of scientific models promised more progress than simply waiting for divine aid. For example, germ theory and modern medicine are much more useful than praying against demons of illness. For actions taking place in the physical, mutually agreed upon world, religion is largely useless. No, this does not imply a spiritual world. It means that technology is not yet able to deliver highly accurate, intelligible information about the human mind (conscious states).

    But what about ideas? Morals are not given by religious authorities, but science is not fit to determine the best moral tenets either. Evolution has provided humans with intelligence and survival instincts. Together this can produce the idea that things like killing and theft negatively affect most everyone if allowed to run rampant. We are social. We form groups. We are intelligent. We create rules and punishments to discourage behavior that is not beneficial to ourselves or the group which supports us. This science is able to determine. And, religious or not, many individuals seem to agree with these ideas. Again, no religion is needed.

    Of course this alone won't keep people from believing whatever they want to believe. It never has.

  • Religion is not necessary.

    Religion itself is of no use. Spirituality is a very different matter. Religion is nothing more than the organization and hierarchy of spirituality. You may believe as you wish in a "religious" sense while belonging to no specific religion. With that being said I think science has supplied enough evidence to keep citizens informed and aware that at the very least all of the information we receive from religion is unnecessary.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.