15 ms·

I appreciate the clarity with which you've articulated your understanding of religion, but I disagree with almost everything you've said. Since the disagreement

by dcre 12y ago

I appreciate the clarity with which you've articulated your understanding of religion, but I disagree with almost everything you've said. Since the disagreement is not really about facts, but rather attitude or orientation, it might be pretty hard for me get you to see it from my perspective, but I'll try. Here's the main idea: you see a fundamental gap between science and religion that in the past simply did not exist. > Ever hear the phrase "God of the gaps"? For a lot of people, that was - and is - how they understand God. This may be true of many people today, but it is an essentially modern understanding of God that cannot have been held by anyone before the Renaissance. Before the scientific worldview existed, there simply were no gaps for God to reside in. What did God mean to people then? Richard Tarnas's The Passion of the Western Mind[1] is a wonderful intellectual history of the West starting from the Greeks. You would probably find it interesting. It traces some of the philosophical roots of Christianity back into Greek thought, and it traces the philosophical roots of your modern worldview back into Christian thought. And before you dismiss me as a religious weirdo, I am a lifelong atheist who has studied a lot of math and physics. [1] http://www.amazon.com/The-Passion-Western-Mind-Understanding/dp/0345368096 http://www.amazon.com/The-Passion-Western-Mind-Understanding...

Kalium 12y ago
Oh, I agree. In the past, religion was the only available mental framework within which people could attempt to make sense of reality. The transition to a society where a framework grounded in methodological materialism is available has not always been a smooth one. For the moment, my concern is limited to what living people think and perceive.
- sounds 12y ago
  Only, that's not what he said. You say, "religion was the only available mental framework" He says, "philosophical roots of Christianity back into Greek thought" ... and ... "philosophical roots of your modern worldview back into Christian thought."
  - Kalium 12y ago
    My understanding was that he sought to explain the lack of a perceived gap in the past by stating that there were not multiple worldviews that could have come into conflict. Further, there was commentary on the history of relevant worldviews.

by dcre 12y ago

Kalium 12y ago

Oh, I agree. In the past, religion was the only available mental framework within which people could attempt to make sense of reality. The transition to a society where a framework grounded in methodological materialism is available has not always been a smooth one. For the moment, my concern is limited to what living people think and perceive.

sounds 12y ago
Only, that's not what he said. You say, "religion was the only available mental framework" He says, "philosophical roots of Christianity back into Greek thought" ... and ... "philosophical roots of your modern worldview back into Christian thought."
- Kalium 12y ago
  My understanding was that he sought to explain the lack of a perceived gap in the past by stating that there were not multiple worldviews that could have come into conflict. Further, there was commentary on the history of relevant worldviews.