3 ms·

Religious fanatics have used this argument for the past few million things that have since been explained by science. Will likely do so for the next who knows h

Religious fanatics have used this argument for the past few million things that have since been explained by science. Will likely do so for the next who knows how many years until everything is explained.

rglover 5y ago
It's a valid argument (prepending "religious fanatics" to discredit it is intellectually weak). Science is nothing more than humans finding explanation for what was already created. The worship of it leads to an ignorance of the "why" and "who," putting an overemphasis on the what, where, when, and how.
- cmrdporcupine 5y ago
  Why? and who? are questions humans ask about their societies, families, and products. Assuming it applies to non-human natural phenomenon is quite intensely anthropomorphic and more than a little arrogant.
  - rglover 5y ago
    I shudder at the thought of your upbringing if curiosity is viewed as arrogance. I'm not assuming that it applies, those are just the best tools I have at my disposal for understanding right now. I patiently await the monolith that changes that (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHWs3c3YNs4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHWs3c3YNs4).
    - cmrdporcupine 5y ago
      My upbringing was evangelical Christian... thus my distaste for theological supremacism.
      - rglover 5y ago
        Yeah, that will do it (I have a close friend in the same boat and understand the distaste). It's difficult, but I'd urge you to separate your views of God from that point of view.
        cmrdporcupine 5y ago
        Beh, I see it as a bonus having had that upbringing and moving on from it. Kind of like an immunization shot. I read a lot of theology and philosophy of religion, frankly, I'm quite religiously literate and my discipline in university was philosophy. But I'm an atheist, or maybe a scientific pantheist of some kind. There's no part of me that is against "asking questions", but part of inquiry is knowing which questions to ask.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]

rglover 5y ago

It's a valid argument (prepending "religious fanatics" to discredit it is intellectually weak). Science is nothing more than humans finding explanation for what was already created. The worship of it leads to an ignorance of the "why" and "who," putting an overemphasis on the what, where, when, and how.

cmrdporcupine 5y ago
Why? and who? are questions humans ask about their societies, families, and products. Assuming it applies to non-human natural phenomenon is quite intensely anthropomorphic and more than a little arrogant.
- rglover 5y ago
  I shudder at the thought of your upbringing if curiosity is viewed as arrogance. I'm not assuming that it applies, those are just the best tools I have at my disposal for understanding right now. I patiently await the monolith that changes that (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHWs3c3YNs4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHWs3c3YNs4).
  - cmrdporcupine 5y ago
    My upbringing was evangelical Christian... thus my distaste for theological supremacism.
    - rglover 5y ago
      Yeah, that will do it (I have a close friend in the same boat and understand the distaste). It's difficult, but I'd urge you to separate your views of God from that point of view.
      - cmrdporcupine 5y ago
        Beh, I see it as a bonus having had that upbringing and moving on from it. Kind of like an immunization shot. I read a lot of theology and philosophy of religion, frankly, I'm quite religiously literate and my discipline in university was philosophy. But I'm an atheist, or maybe a scientific pantheist of some kind. There's no part of me that is against "asking questions", but part of inquiry is knowing which questions to ask.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]