Science, Religeons prodigal son

[kaziard]

This is based on simple research I did.

I'm talking about how things between Science and religion used to be.

before dipshits from both sides of this dualistic melee started over-assuming and arguing.

people started getting all defensive of their faith or firm non-belief.

I'm not talking about what I want people to believe, I just said "HEY!! Such-and Such!!" godamn!!!

something you should learn about the escapist forums: any thread containing the words "religion" and "science" in the same sentence usually end up like this, its no use trying to stem the tide.

OT yeas this does seem like an interesting observation, and its still happening in modern times (theory of the big bang as a relatively recent case)

 

[bodyklok]

People should actually listen and then THINK...just sit there and Think, before appropriating any kind of response.

because peope are misunderstanding what kind of coversation I'm leading here.

I never once made a statement about what I "believe" I'm just cmmenting on something I found out.

what's the problem. everything isn't always what people think it is?

People don't always 'think' in the same way as each other, both a blessing and a curse if you asked me, because of this you need to really clearly explain what your trying to say if you want people to understand you. Rather than just saying whats in your head, talk about the what lead you to think of it, and what it means. It's not a case of people being idiots when they don't understand you, it's just a case of them being dramatically different in how their cognitive faculties actually work.

Also,

I was just simply stating one of the origins of early science...

I never said anything about other people it's just an interesting realization.

I already knew about this, as do many people, there have been multiple books and papers done on this subject. I'm not saying it's not interesting, it's fascinating really, but you've haven't said anything new here.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

The only valid point you presented was the literature statement, and that has nothing to do with science. Everything else is basically saying "in a time when everyone was religious, religious people did science"

"Science originated in religeon because religius teachings were bases for most philosophical thought in the ancient world."
Philosophy and science have nothing to do with each other, as philisophy is based on personal values, opinions, and beliefs, where science is based completely on facts. Sometimes philosophy LEADS to scientific insight, for example Columbus thinks that the earth is round and sails around it to prove it. And philosophy and organized religion have nothing to do with each other because philosophy exercises free thought while religion says "This is how shit is, this is what you have to do, this is right, this is wrong"

"maths like algebra were develped by islamic scholars, geneology riginated in cathlic abbeys."
assuming that's true, islamic scholars developed algebra. Religious facilities used to be the only place for education that far back.

Just because ancient science was done by religious people, that just makes it congruent, not interdependent. Also, in pretty much any Abrahamic society before the 1800s being an Atheist warranted the death penalty. So even if an Atheist where to discover something scientifically he would go on document as a christian/muslum/ect. unless it challenged the church, (IE Heliocentrism) then his findings would be declared moot and/or he would be sentenced to death for blasphemy.

In other words, if you're trying to convince us that religion is the basis for science, you're doing a really bad job of it.

EDIT:

People should actually listen and then THINK...just sit there and Think, before appropriating any kind of response.

Why? You obviously didn't put much thought into the topic, and hypocrisy isn't exactly helping your case.

 

[Arrers]

I know what you're getting at, but your spelling is, to put it bluntly, dire. anyway science and religion have had rocky relationship, a bit like those on again-off again one in teen dramas. for exaple it was roughduring the Reneiesance, good in Newton's day and then they fell out scince Darwinism.

 

[dandahammer]

To OP (original poster)

A Professor of mine kinda outlined why most learning stemmed from most belief systems. Before the printing press, monks and priest were the only ones that could read and write.

That is, of course, the extreme 'in a nutshell' version of why the basics of science emerged from reilgion.

 

[Zac_Dai]

Thats like saying beer and war went hand in hand with religion.

Because monks brewed a lot it and people fought for religion.

Infact you could do this with anything seeing as religion use to be central part of everyones lives.

Stupid argument.

 

[HentMas]

I'm not talking about what I want people to believe, I just said "HEY!! Such-and Such!!" godamn!!!

If you don't want people to believe it, why make it public at all?

wow, hahahaha, your post wins!!, well, because he wanted to "discuss" it man, chill out, "hey, i found out that we all come from vermin, comment!!" it is what i found out, i dont want everyone to think like me, i am just saying what i think!

dear god, some people, well, i believe OP is right, fait and religious belief was the first approach to some kind of understanding on life, wich lead later on to science

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

Science originated in religeon because religius teachings were bases for most philosophical thought in the ancient world.

maths like algebra were develped by islamic scholars, geneology riginated in cathlic abbeys.

without abbeys, the rebound of literacy after the dark ages may have never happened.

one of the first peple to a scientific method for solving problems was a catholic monk of the Franciscan order.

You see, the reason for all of that is because in those days being a man of the cloth was pretty much the only way of getting a really decent education. Gregor Mendel figured out geneology because he had the time to muck about with peas all day. He was dead by the time people actually started believing his theories.

The problem as I see it is that whereas science is constantly moving on and doing new things, religion travels at a much slower rate. For example, look at what a big deal was made of women being ordained. But women doctors and scientists were common.
Because the two advance at different speeds, it creates friction between them as science simply outstrips religion

 

[Pendragon9]

Either way Science and religion have gone way too far.

 

[Agayek]

Science originated in religeon because religius teachings were bases for most philosophical thought in the ancient world.

maths like algebra were develped by islamic scholars, geneology riginated in cathlic abbeys.

without abbeys, the rebound of literacy after the dark ages may have never happened.

one of the first peple to a scientific method for solving problems was a catholic monk of the Franciscan order.

the ORIGINAL natures of religeon and science went hand in hand. learning about, utilizing and appreciating the world, learning new things and adding that knowledge t a strong basis of faith is what made some ancient nations great.

I've come to understand this truth very deeply...

but... y'know

I'd like to hear what you think...

(I wrote this in a rush, disregard my spelling)

Religion and science went hand in hand, until science began to prove religion wrong.

Both arise from the human desire to understand themselves, the world around them, and their purpose for existing.

The problem, or at least the main source of contention between them, is that science offers proof or the statement "Nobody knows", while religion offers knowledge of everything, if only you have a little faith.

Some people believe science's approach is the best one to understand the nature of existence, while others believe religion's is. There is no right answer to this, and there probably never will be, so long as there exists something that science cannot explain.

Personally, I believe science has the right idea, and it seems that belief is becoming more prevalent as science progresses further and further while religion stagnates.

 

[Agayek]

What about ancient Greek philosophers? Were they religious?

Yes. From what little I've read on the subject many of them did believe in the Greek Pantheon, if for no other reason than cultural acceptance. Did they believe they would be smote for whatever reason? No idea, but they almost certainly professed a belief in the gods of their culture.

religion =/= science.

One asks why
One says because.



if you dont know which is which then I cant help you.

You really don't know anything about religion do you?

The entire point of religions is to explain life, the universe and everything. People are uncomfortable with not knowing the who, what, where, when and why. Religion is simply a means for some to answer those questions.

Whether or not some/most/all religions were started as a means to control the populace is up for debate, but the reason most people believe in them is because they answer questions nothing else can.