“Religion and blind faith are some of the greatest impediments ever to human learning and progress.”
Anon.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, December 22nd, 2010 at 1:00 and is filed under QOTD.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Sadly, I attribute faith to alcoholism. It has a lot of the same “feel good” effects as alcohol, and is sipped in along with the crowd. It’s even just as damaging to society as alcohol. If faith were to be taught in school as “truth” over science, then actual facts will diminish and you will have nothing more than hollow puppets that thrive solely on emotion until they become ill and pass.
tech, which points do you disagree with: that religious belief is like alcoholism; that reason is preferable to faith; or that if faith is given greater credence than science in schools then reason will become subservient to emotion within the society? Explain your reasoning.
This reminds me of a passage from Sagan’s Pale Blue Dot:
How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, ‘This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant?’ Instead they say, ‘No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.’
Case in point, the Catholic Church refused until 1832 to remove Galileo’s work from its list of books which Catholics were forbidden to read at the risk of dire punishment of their immortal souls.
I think this is truer now than perhaps it was a few hundred years ago. In Newton’s time for example to examine the world was to examine God’s creation and was almost an act of religion in itself. Today religion is terrified of knowledge that makes gods an unnecessary part of reality.
Perhaps religion in general (not specific fundamentalist examples) was a necessary part of human development that we had to experience and then hopefully move on from?
For every prophet preaching their ‘truth’ you had a scientist spurred on by this to seek the facts.
Not forgetting some of the most beautiful paintings, sculptures and statues(The last Supper, Michelangelo’s David, Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro), feats of engineering wonder (The Pyramids, Statue of Zeus at Olympia and countless Cathedrals and Mosques) have all been commissioned by one religious institution or another (sadly because they had all the money and power)
These were certainly not impediments to learning and progress?
I guess I’m saying blind faith is just daft but perhaps religion was a necessary evil?
PEB – Great and beautiful works of art can be created without religion, just like good morals. While those buildings and works of art are not impediments themselves, the people that commisioned them were. Impediments to critical thinking and human rights, to name two. Anything good that HAPPENS to be done by religion, can certainly be done without it. (Just as there are many atheists who help the poor, etc.)
Perhaps religion is a necessary part of our evolution? Perhaps it was unavoidable? If the human race was wiped out tomorrow and the evolutionary cycle starts again then superstitions and religions would be invented again to explain it all.
I guess it comes down this: “Would a world with a completely secular past be more scientifically or culturally advanced than the world we live in today?”
PEB, I’ve wondered something similar. If there were some worldwide cataclysm, nuclear war or something, and most of society were destroyed, and if this included all bibles (all scriptures, in fact), how would a re-emerging society re-learn about gods or Jesus? They could re-learn math, physics, biology, etc. These things are self-evident and never-changing. In time, someone would stumble on the quadratic formula and E=mc² again. But with no documents from the past, how would people know about Adam or Eve or Moses or Abraham or even Muhammad? You couldn’t get this knowledge from studying geology or meteorology. The Earth has nothing to tell us about divinity. God would have to send new prophets and sons all over again!
This is where religion completely fails in providing “truth”, and why science is so much better at it.
December 22nd, 2010 at 2:30
Sadly, I attribute faith to alcoholism. It has a lot of the same “feel good” effects as alcohol, and is sipped in along with the crowd. It’s even just as damaging to society as alcohol. If faith were to be taught in school as “truth” over science, then actual facts will diminish and you will have nothing more than hollow puppets that thrive solely on emotion until they become ill and pass.
December 22nd, 2010 at 3:13
I strongly disagree.
December 22nd, 2010 at 4:25
tech, which points do you disagree with: that religious belief is like alcoholism; that reason is preferable to faith; or that if faith is given greater credence than science in schools then reason will become subservient to emotion within the society? Explain your reasoning.
December 22nd, 2010 at 8:09
This reminds me of a passage from Sagan’s Pale Blue Dot:
Case in point, the Catholic Church refused until 1832 to remove Galileo’s work from its list of books which Catholics were forbidden to read at the risk of dire punishment of their immortal souls.
December 22nd, 2010 at 9:26
Religious thinkers are the obstacle for the developement of human recources.
December 22nd, 2010 at 9:50
I think this is truer now than perhaps it was a few hundred years ago. In Newton’s time for example to examine the world was to examine God’s creation and was almost an act of religion in itself. Today religion is terrified of knowledge that makes gods an unnecessary part of reality.
December 22nd, 2010 at 10:48
I agree (strongly) with today’s quotation.
December 22nd, 2010 at 13:19
Perhaps religion in general (not specific fundamentalist examples) was a necessary part of human development that we had to experience and then hopefully move on from?
For every prophet preaching their ‘truth’ you had a scientist spurred on by this to seek the facts.
Not forgetting some of the most beautiful paintings, sculptures and statues(The last Supper, Michelangelo’s David, Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro), feats of engineering wonder (The Pyramids, Statue of Zeus at Olympia and countless Cathedrals and Mosques) have all been commissioned by one religious institution or another (sadly because they had all the money and power)
These were certainly not impediments to learning and progress?
I guess I’m saying blind faith is just daft but perhaps religion was a necessary evil?
December 22nd, 2010 at 16:20
No, not a necessary evil. Just a great way to control gullible, uneducated masses.
December 22nd, 2010 at 16:54
PEB – Great and beautiful works of art can be created without religion, just like good morals. While those buildings and works of art are not impediments themselves, the people that commisioned them were. Impediments to critical thinking and human rights, to name two. Anything good that HAPPENS to be done by religion, can certainly be done without it. (Just as there are many atheists who help the poor, etc.)
December 22nd, 2010 at 17:29
Great quote!
December 22nd, 2010 at 18:25
Perhaps religion is a necessary part of our evolution? Perhaps it was unavoidable? If the human race was wiped out tomorrow and the evolutionary cycle starts again then superstitions and religions would be invented again to explain it all.
I guess it comes down this: “Would a world with a completely secular past be more scientifically or culturally advanced than the world we live in today?”
December 22nd, 2010 at 18:37
PEB, I’ve wondered something similar. If there were some worldwide cataclysm, nuclear war or something, and most of society were destroyed, and if this included all bibles (all scriptures, in fact), how would a re-emerging society re-learn about gods or Jesus? They could re-learn math, physics, biology, etc. These things are self-evident and never-changing. In time, someone would stumble on the quadratic formula and E=mc² again. But with no documents from the past, how would people know about Adam or Eve or Moses or Abraham or even Muhammad? You couldn’t get this knowledge from studying geology or meteorology. The Earth has nothing to tell us about divinity. God would have to send new prophets and sons all over again!
This is where religion completely fails in providing “truth”, and why science is so much better at it.