Science the only true religion?

 
ManS
 
Avatar
 
 
ManS
Total Posts:  1
Joined  09-02-2014
 
 
 
09 February 2014 01:39
 

I have presented some philosophical arguments against Sam’s views.. comments welcome:

Science - the only true religion?

[ Edited: 09 February 2014 01:58 by ManS]
 
llathander
 
Avatar
 
 
llathander
Total Posts:  42
Joined  11-12-2013
 
 
 
09 February 2014 07:53
 

Ill give it a go, but calling science a religion is already statement which will get you quickly marginalized, unless you want to use definition 3 as the operative one. If you do that, you have already diluted the word to the point as to effectively render it useless.

re·li·gion noun \ri-?li-j?n\
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods

: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods

: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group

I guess knitting clubs are religions too then…huh.

 
ManS
 
Avatar
 
 
ManS
Total Posts:  1
Joined  09-02-2014
 
 
 
09 February 2014 09:55
 
llathander - 09 February 2014 07:53 AM

Ill give it a go, but calling science a religion is already statement which will get you quickly marginalized, unless you want to use definition 3 as the operative one. If you do that, you have already diluted the word to the point as to effectively render it useless.

It does look like the title raises more questions to more people than the content itself grin
In the post I am arguing that people’s insistence on the objectivity of science is as religious as the insistence of the correctness of any religion.
I am arguing against that basis which Sam uses to argue against moral relativism.

 
Feather
 
Avatar
 
 
Feather
Total Posts:  185
Joined  18-03-2013
 
 
 
10 February 2014 12:34
 

When humans form a group for any reason it will always be a religion. Even an anti-religion group.
-
This is a result of psychology. When humans feel dissatisfied, they search for content and drift through thoughts until a relationship can be made between a set of thoughts that gives some satisfaction. This process is driven by what is felt to be important.
-
The moment something is assessed to be important, that something is what a person will become delusional about.  Because the thinking process is driven by a psychological need to derive satisfaction (gain what is deemed important). The relationships, connections, judgments, assessments, and beliefs we make between thoughts, are made by an unconscious grasp at satisfaction.
Notice they every wondering thought you have is a result of a lack of satisfaction in the moment. And your mind searches and drifts until it makes a connection that brings satisfaction, THEN you actively use your intellect to justify it, through fantasy, omitting data based on prejudice, or just not doing a thuro honest or good investigation and stopping short, or joining a likeminded group to feel confidence in numbers.
-
Any group with common ideas of what is important…will have common delusion.
-
What we call religion is a type of delusion, or a delusion on a certain topic. That doesn’t mean that just because one is not a part of that certain type of delusion they are not delusional. I can make the definition that wacko’s wear orange shirts, and since I am not wearing an orange shirt I can’t be a wacko…That is not how this works. If you are a human, you are delusional and have some propensity to becoming less or more delusional, it is based on your physiology , your brain, what you eat, amount of stress, and mental hygiene.
*****
In the blog, I don’t think this is understood. A part from a human hand, there is and exist one kind of logic. Now once we have different groups of humans performing the logic all with different common assessments of importance you get a wide variety of knowledge.
-
So a Modern Science in the west, has a lot of useful knowledge, where a Christian based Science might have a lot of useful knowledge, but it is in all the opportunities of either inconclusive data or data where they have an opportunity to get away with ignoring it is when they will do “BAD SCIENCE”.
-
How Modern Science in the west or science in any other culture differs is in those opportunities for “Bad Science”. Modern Science in the West is full of “Bad Science” from delusional people, just like any other group based science.
-
Maybe I am agreeing with what you are trying to get across as far as Western Science.
-
But I agree with Sam that there is only one kind of moral truth. We get moral realivitism because different groups have a different assessment on what is important.  Yet there exist like the one kind of logic, there is one kind of actual importance. And that is a fact on a biological human organism ... anthropological level. 
-
When we watch a horror movie and you cringe at somebody cutting off somebodies head that is that fact of nature at work. Deeply in your physiology, in your nature, it is not beneficial to cut off any part of our collective heads. It’s in our human nature that lets us know that human flourishing and the advancement of well-being is the “real” moral goal or that one true thing which is actually important. It is a self-evident truth.
-
Anytime, we think something is important other than what our physiology tells us, we tend to hurt each other.

 
SeanShubin
 
Avatar
 
 
SeanShubin
Total Posts:  10
Joined  14-03-2014
 
 
 
04 September 2014 21:44
 
ManS - 09 February 2014 01:39 AM

Science - the only true religion?

I find it hard to take equating science to religion seriously.


Science attempts to discover nature rather than how to properly worship a superhuman controlling power.
Science gets its information from experiment and observation rather than ancient books.


These differences are sufficient enough for me to reject the notion that science is “the only true religion”, or religion at all for that matter.

 
 
Pattertwig
 
Avatar
 
 
Pattertwig
Total Posts:  121
Joined  23-02-2015
 
 
 
23 February 2015 13:28
 
SeanShubin - 04 September 2014 09:44 PM
ManS - 09 February 2014 01:39 AM

Science - the only true religion?

I find it hard to take equating science to religion seriously.

Science attempts to discover nature rather than how to properly worship a superhuman controlling power.
Science gets its information from experiment and observation rather than ancient books.

These differences are sufficient enough for me to reject the notion that science is “the only true religion”, or religion at all for that matter.

One does not have to equate science to religion, to point out that the worship of science, or faith in a science that one makes no effort to understand, looks and smells an awful lot like religion.

Some of the threads on this forum adopt a fairly religious tone, e.g. “Sam Harris Points Out the Way in “Waking Up”, or this thread, where the OP calls for an atheist inquisition where religious leaders are put on the stand and required to prove that their views are correct (in a procedure which sounds uncomfortably like some Sunni variants of a trial for apostasy).

Hypocrisy and religion are unavoidable aspects of the human condition, few truly escape.

 

 
 
SeanShubin
 
Avatar
 
 
SeanShubin
Total Posts:  10
Joined  14-03-2014
 
 
 
23 February 2015 22:27
 
Nankipoo - 23 February 2015 01:28 PM

One does not have to equate science to religion, to point out that the worship of science, or faith in a science that one makes no effort to understand, looks and smells an awful lot like religion.

Worship and faith are not science.
Pointing out that worship is not science is perfectly valid.
Pointing out that faith is not science is perfectly valid.
It is equating the practice of science with religion, worship, or faith, that is invalid.


worship
- the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity.
- show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites.


faith
- complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
- strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.


science
- the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

 

 
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2735
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
23 February 2015 23:55
 

The key difference is that belief in science does not make it better science - in fact it makes it worse since without falsification there is no science.

 
 
northstreet
 
Avatar
 
 
northstreet
Total Posts:  27
Joined  01-02-2015
 
 
 
26 February 2015 15:08
 

I hope a religion can be developed which does not conflict with science. The first requirement is that this religion not depend on any notion of any sort of deity. What it does depend on is the subjective experience of sacredness. All concepts of disembodied intelligence, consciousness, intention and other attributes of humans (or other animals) are an insult to what we have learned so far through science. The experience of sacredness in no way depends upon any concept of a disembodied intelligence, or really any concept at all. In fact this experience arises when our attention moves out of conceptual thought into a more direct way of perceiving ourselves and the world around us. Sam Harris does an excellent job of presenting this in the book ‘Waking Up’. The tendency of people in our culture to associate a religious vocabulary with a deity is simply a limitation of our culture. Sam uses the word ‘spirituality’ with absolutely no reference to ‘spirits’. We can take words which have come out of traditional religious experience and reshape them to fit our modern world view. I would rather do that than to bring foreign words like ‘dharma’ into our vocabulary. I do find it helpful to draw on traditional non-theistic religions like Buddhism and Taoism, but we have to rely on our own experience to make sense of them.

 
jacobpante
 
Avatar
 
 
jacobpante
Total Posts:  3
Joined  10-11-2016
 
 
 
10 November 2016 09:25
 
ManS - 09 February 2014 01:39 AM

I have presented some philosophical arguments against Sam’s views.. comments welcome:

Science - the only true religion?

It’s more “logic”, reason is true religion.

 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5100
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
07 January 2017 20:06
 

I concur with a lot of your piece but can’t endorse the title. Obscuring the distinction between science and religion isn’t helping.