Is Science a Religion?

Boy, religion is a funny thing, isn't it? Even if you develop your body of knowledge soley by auditable, non-supernatural means; even if you replace nonsense with fact; even if you do the exact opposite of what religion typically means, somehow you have it anyway.Religion is typically defined as:

quote:

---

Religion is the adherence to codified beliefs and rituals that generally involve a faith in a spiritual nature and a study of inherited ancestral traditions, knowledge and wisdom related to understanding human life. The term "religion" refers to both the personal practices related to faith as well as to the larger shared systems of belief.

---

Religion - WikipediaScience doesn't involve codified beliefs, science doesn't involve ritual, science isn't a personal practice of faith or a shared system of belief. So in what sense is it a religion? The tortured logic of your post is all but impossible to follow.Science isn't any more a religion than a teapot is a religion. A religion is simply not what it is.

To equate science and religion. People know that science is important, and that they probably ought to know something about it.But science is hard, and so if they can convince themselves that their religion is the same as science, well, religion is designed to be easy to learn. So they think they've found the loophole.

Because it isn't. Because that's not what it is. No, they're trying to avoid falsehood. Because evolution is an accurate model supported by the evidence. Why should that be surprising? Religion, to a surprising degree, is founded on bullshit. Scientific models like evolution, on the other hand, are founded on evidence. No surprise then that religion would find itself in conflict with what is true. How can you possibly arrive at the truth by making things up?

If you're reading this message, you're looking at one reason science is so popular. Unlike religion, science gets results. I sense you're attempting the "throw as much shit at the wall as possible and see what sticks" strategy. As a suggestion, why don't you sit down and think through one really good argument and present it instead of peppering us with things you must know can't possibly be true.If science is an open license for debauchery and bad behavior, then why are so many of the world's incorrigable rogues and villians so thouroughly religious?

Yeah, just now. I dropped a spoon. And there was the force of gravity, pulling it to the floor!

What? No, spoons definitely reflect light.

Yes, it is. Just as your philosophy takes no position on the existence of Flying Spaghetti Monsters (or didn't, until I asked you to take one just now), it's completely possible to have a system of knowledge that takes no position on your God.The "God issue", as you put it, is a non-issue - there's no evidence for God, and therefore nothing for science to take a position on.Science is a "religion" in the same way that bald is a hair color.

How can I? There's nothing to take a position on. Circular reasoning. You're attempting to prove that God is the sole originator of life, the universe, and everything; by starting from the assumption that God has to be the originator.In fact it seems like those who believe as you are the ones who are unable to think. Ever since you arrived here, you're provided nothing but the most spurious, poorly-conceived arguments and bigotry (not to mention a considerable amount of spam in my mailbox.) Peppered with meaningless Bible quotes, of course, as though the Bible could possibly be a source who I would recognize on these matters.It's a book written by sheepherders. I don't find it the least bit relevant to these proceedings. Why would it?

Here's a typical adult human heart:Can you show me where your God's law, or anything at all for that matter, is written on it?

I'm still waiting for you to do so. Where on that organ do you see anything written? Lol! No, that little voice is me.You've been talking to yourself for a very long time, Rob.Yes, because it's just an organ. It has no capacity for speech, nor for doing anything except circulating blood. Which don't exist. Look, you were doing better when you were talking about hearts; at least those are real organs. Spirit? Soul? Can you point to those on an anatomy chart, Rob? Your nonsense is a mental prison, sequestering your good sense. It's bricks are the pages of your nonsense Bible. Tear down your own wall, Rob.

I don't know what "other voice" you're talking about. If you're hearing voices, Rob, maybe you should talk to someone about that. No, I'm just me. No, it's not, Rob. I thought it was for many years, but I was wrong, as are you. It was my voice, it's your voice. Maybe you have me confused with someone else, somebody who thinks that there's no such thing as absolutely existing or absolutely not existing.I can assure you that I don't. Souls and spirits don't exist. God doesn't exist. The only voice that speaks inside your head is your own, Rob.

All the ideas in your head are just you. All the ideas in my head are just me. When we communicate, ideas in my head are used to cause ideas in yours, but they're rarely the exact same ideas (highlighting how important the participation of the listener to the process is.) From people. Hitler's ideas came from himself. People's ideas abut Hitler come from them. Yes. There is no such thing as the "soul." I don't need to have someone tell me what is obvious.

Except that I know the opposite. It's obvious that "God" is a myth - it has all the hallmarks of the kind of bullshit people make up to make themselves feel better. Topographically (if you will) it's the same as the Tooth Fairy and everything else that isn't true.I mean that's staggeringly obvious. If God exists, why is everything that is supposedly "known" about God mythical? Try to imagine that you're talking to someone who believes that the exact opposite is true - not only true, obvious to the most causal observer. Actually don't pretend - you are. Clearly homosexuality is neither right nor wrong. But what does that have to do with me? That is false; the exact opposite is true.

No, God is false. Truth is truth. Clearly you have, if your posts are any indication. What's your training, logic-wise? Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

Well, it's true that the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the two bases, but is that God?What you suggest seems semantically useless, at best. And what use is praying to the Pythagorean theorem?* Anyway, I try not to decide what is true, but to learn what is true.(*Sorry, I meant "hypotenuse-square theorem", as according to the most recent racism thread.)