Quote:
Originally Posted by Xujhan
Why are they? Because people are argumentative and like competing. I don't think that's a very interesting question, personally.
|
True; however, you would normally expect the competing propositions to bear more than superficial similarity. For instance, if people were arguing over the comparative merits of apples and oranges, you can at least see the logic in that both are foodstuffs, specifically fruit, and are eaten for similar beneficial properties. If, on the other hand, people were arguing over the comparative merits of apples and baseballs, it would be hard to draw any conclusion other than that they had lost the plot. Beyond superficial similarity, there is no reasonable connection or reason for comparison. I wouldn't go so far as to say religion vs science advocates had lost the plot, but in terms of the similarities between religion and science there are very little besides both containing forms of knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xujhan
Neither does asserting that religion "is intended to be a guide to how to live life as part of a community" make it so, and I would say that's a much more glaring omission than any I made. Why, other than your own divine authority, is that what religion is 'really about'?
|
I never said that was solely what it was about, and it would do you more credit in future to not jump to conclusions in such a manner. To answer your question as to where my authority to make such statements come from, I would direct you to passages such as Leviticus in the Bible, the numerous passages concerning treating one's neighbour and such like in the same work (which falls under the concept of being "part of a community"), and similar passages in the Qur'an and countless other religious works. Much as such works take their premise from a more supernatural basis, ultimately they are intended to direct human beings as to how to conduct their daily lives and live in a community based on their shared belief. I do not see how that is such a controversial statement, or why you take exception to that above all others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xujhan
And since it seems my original post wasn't clear enough: any religious justification for a proposition eventually rests on the claim "my god exists," (or perhaps more generally "my religion is true") otherwise it would be a secular justification. Both of those claims conflicts with science because they make empyrical claims that are unsupported by evidence.
|
The mere fact that the nature of religious belief does not follow the scientific method does not sufficiently explain why the two continue to be portrayed as implacable foes. Were religion actively trying to assume the role of science (by which I mean the whole group of them, not sects like the creationist movement or such like), then I could understand why that would be a problem; however, as religion is not doing that and has not done so for some time (if memory serves me correctly) this does not strike me as explaining the vitriol from both sides. I hasten to add, I take issue with both parties in this one, believers and nonbelievers alike - it just seems to me to be an utterly pointless argument, like the apples vs baseballs example I used above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xujhan
Lastly: you didn't answer my question either, and it wasn't even a hard one.
|
It's normally considered good form to give an answer to a question that is asked, rather than respond with another question and expect that to be answered first. As your post did not appear to answer the question posed, I felt under no obligation to respond as it was not relevant to the topic - it seems more a question about my personal beliefs rather than the religion vs science debate. In light of the further response given above, I am more than happy to do so now provided it does not hijack the thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xujhan
What is it you feel that religion provides that secular alternatives don't?
|
The main thing, I suppose, would be an aid to spirituality. I am someone who believes in the existence of a spiritual aspect to life (and I fully recognise that is likely not to be a belief you share, as with belief in God, and I respect that) and so that is the main thing I would say it provides. As such, I find the pitting of science and politics as secular alternatives to religion somewhat spurious, as I believe that the only one which fits that bill properly is philosophy. I trust that addresses your question suitably but if not I am happy to expand further.