|
Re: Religion vs Science...why? -
September 19th 2011, 01:30 AM
What is it you feel that religion provides that secular alternatives don't? Recognize that science isn't the only secular alternative to religion; philosophy is another, and poltics arguably a third. I don't believe anyone suggests that any of these individually is all that is necessary to uphold a society, only that religion isn't itself necessary. If you think that religion dictates how to live well, that is a question that can be answered with a mix of science and philosophy.
The problem with the kind of religion you're advocating, in my eyes, is that it lacks justification. Why should we accept a particular set of moral principles or other such norms as the right ones? Any answer that doesn't invoke god is non-religious, and any answer that does invoke god is then in a position of having to demonstrate that god exists to validate the argument.
In short, I don't see religion as having any more significant upside than providing comforting feelings to the religious, and on balance I don't think that justifies the harm caused by religion.
The atoms that make up you and me were born in the hearts of suns many times greater than ours, and in time our atoms will once again reside amongst the stars. Life is but an idle dalliance of the cosmos, frail, and soon forgotten. We have been set adrift in an ocean whose tides we are only beginning to comprehend and with that maturity has come the realization that we are, at least for now, alone. In that loneliness, it falls to us to shine as brightly as the stars from which we came.
|