• CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      “you don’t need to tell us not to be anti-religious because of Science, you need to tell people not to be anti-Science because of religion.”

      My dude, I’m telling both. Which group is more common in this comment section?

      • ameancow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Which group is more common in this comment section?

        Lemmy is a predominantly young, leftist or liberal community, religion is going to be a minority here in all regards. When you come in “both siding” religion broadly, you’re asking a lot of people who already have discarded religion to accept some part of it without giving a good reason or argument why.

        You don’t need religion to come up with morality, philosophical ideas about nature or anything else religion claims to have the monopoly on. It’s fine if people want to have belief for themselves about higher powers or spirituality, but again, that shouldn’t even be placed on the same table as actual systems of reason and logic and material science.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          When you come in “both siding” religion broadly

          I am not “both siding”, I am saying they have nothing to do with each other.

          you’re asking a lot of people who already have discarded religion to accept some part of it

          Where did I do that? I simply said there is no point and no reason to try to use science to argue against religion. The fact that people seem to find that offensive makes me think there are a lot of people wasting their time trying to use science to argue against religion.

          • ameancow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            People who think Science and Religion are opposed to one another don’t understand either one.

            This was your first paragraph, you are starting with the thesis that someone like me, who has defended truth from religious attacks for decades, that I simply “misunderstand” the people who are screaming that God doesn’t want us to get vaccines or learn about cosmology.

            Science is on the defense against a powerful, hateful, spiteful ideology that has been wearing us all down for millenia. Religion is fucking HOSTILE so no, you need to focus your statement against the actual antagonist here. This isn’t a place to use this pathetic neutral language, we have active fucking book-burnings happening in the USA right now, as schools become defunded even more than they already are.

      • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        To put it bluntly, Science wouldn’t give any shits about religion if religion would stay in their lane.

        While there’s plenty of atheists who have taken up the charge of destroying religion as much as they possibly can, with limited success, Science has, to my knowledge, never tried to influence religious teachings. Religion, conversely, has tried to stop, slow or otherwise discredit, scientific research, and understanding.

        It seems to me that if religion would stay in its lane, this problem wouldn’t exist.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Science has, to my knowledge, never tried to influence religious teachings

          The meme I was responding to seems to be specifically trying to use Science to discredit religion.

          Religion, conversely, has tried to stop, slow or otherwise discredit, scientific research, and understanding.

          And I argue strongly against any idiots trying to do that. However It’s incredibly disingenuous to claim “Religion” as a whole does this. Many scientist are religious in some for or another, so it’s not the concept of “Religion” that tries to discredit scientific research, it’s specific groups using religion as an excuse. The AntiVax MAGA crowd aren’t trying to stop vaccines for religious reasons, they’re doing it for political reasons. Some of them might try to use religion as an excuse (despite their religious literature saying nothing that would oppose vaccines) because they do not actually understand either religion or science.

          • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            I understand your argument, and I recognize that you’re discussing the current state of affairs on the current political and social landscape.

            My statements, as a whole, are not specific to the current state of affairs. Religion and belief tried to deny that the earth revolves around the sun, as an example. Of course, there’s hundreds of examples of this kind of interference. Darwin’s evolution theory is another prime example. I won’t go on or this will turn into an anti-religion rant.

            The problems I’m pointing at are much broader in scope and longer in the timeline / deeper in history than what you seem to be discussing.

            I’m only generalizing about “religion” rather than a specific group or religion, because it’s happened so often and come from so many different sources that it’s hard to not generalize as “religion” vs naming all the various belief systems that have hindered scientific progress and understanding.

            Certainly religion, as a concept as a much more broad and lingering effect on our society, from state religions (mostly eliminated in developed nations), like the church of England, and other, similar religious organizations, where you were obligated to believe in that religion if you lived in that nation or state, to policy set by proxy, by religious groups or extremist believers. Things that oppose bodily autonomy, and equality… Among others. While these are relevant to our society, both historically, and presently, they are not necessarily blocking, refuting, denying, or otherwise trying to remove scientific knowledge and understanding. It’s a sad state of affairs that we allow such things to have a significant impact on our society, but these things are not significantly impacting our ability to make scientific discovery and progress.

            Speaking strictly of direct interference from religious organizations and belief, both now and especially historically, and the damage it has caused to scientific progress and discovery, is difficult to quantify. Needless to say, it has been a significant detriment to scientific progress.

            I cannot think of any examples of Science, or any scientist, trying to influence what religion teaches, or what the followers of that religion believe. Science is happy to let entire swaths of people deny what they say and believe whatever the hell they want. Science and scientists will proceed with the information they have; nobody cares what you think your sky daddy has to say about it.

            There will always be people using Science to denounce bad teachings from the church, but this is limited in scope, and generally on an individual basis; typically atheists who are anti-religion will use scientific truths to dissuade beliefs in general, not any specific teaching. Any/all scientific organizations have no comment on the matter.