"Science" Is the Next Religion: A Tool for Politicians to Keep People in Line
|
True science is observation of reality and nothing more. Applied science is using what is known to manipulate what is observed. "Science" when used in the modern religious context as some kind of god is a philosophy of religion. The word "science" in this context is used as a propaganda tool masking the religion of "Naturalism" which claims it's beliefs to be scientific when they are based on philosophy rather than observed science. The religion is "naturalism", the theme is "evolution", and the god is "reason". They are all subjective to the feelings of the believer, and the goal is to be fully convinced that death excuses the believer from justice. The promise is that the believer is justified by it's own existence and cannot be held accountable in death. There is no need to believe Naturalism to understand, appreciate, explore, and invent in any of the sciences. There are many, though a minority among scientists, exceedingly highly accomplished scientists who reject the religion of "Naturalism" which is being idolized institutionally in many countries today. "Naturalism" is idolatry, worshipping nature and projecting into it a "force" which drives life with no objective value or purpose. 1
point
I must respectfully disagree, I work in the healthcare industry I am with people of all faiths or the lack of, most are Christian. The demeanor is the same for almost all when they are given a terminal diagnosis. There is no "Hooray I'm going to Heaven now". If that is your life's goal you would think that accomplishing it would be a great accomplishment. Yet Christians and atheists alike seek treatment to stay alive. The cancer treatment centers and hospitals are not filled with atheists as you would suggest. 1
point
Las cosas que actualmente se han descubierto por parte de la ciencia en la antigüedad se observaban como cosas imposibles. Estamos hablando de un contexto cultural "una realidad" en la cual convergen los conceptos y fenómenos que hasta el momento se han verificado. Si nos cerramos a esta incertidumbre y negación de lo sobrenatural estamos mutilando la parte activa de la ciencia y petrificándola en el Dogma. Cuando no cuestionamos y no logramos adentrarnos en lo desconocido el conocimiento muere. 3
points
1
point
Like most people that give comments like yours you have never actually studied anything about evolution. Much of evolution is factual information of things which have been discovered throughout the world that cannot be disputed. There is an evolutionary theory which is based on the things that have been found which is disputable yet the more probable answer. Then there is creationism, that is supported only by the ancient writings of a bronze age tribe of nomadic warriors who had only the physical evidence in their day to day lives to work from. I exist but why, I guess that someone had to have made me, we will call it God. There was a lot of science used in that theory, LOL 1
point
Much of evolution is factual information of things which have been discovered throughout the world that cannot be disputed Satan put it there so you would think that! Try arguing with such nonsense. Then there is creationism, that is supported only by the ancient writings of a bronze age tribe of nomadic warriors who had only the physical evidence in their day to day lives to work from. I wouldn't say they had even that much. Instead, they had traditions and legends that date back thousands of years even before them. Almost everything in the Bible - the so-called literal word of God, every character, period, comma being the Truth and nothing but the Truth - is derived from previous myth. The Bible is one of the most hackneyed books in existence. I daresay, were it to have been written in the last century, the author would have been sued for copyright infringement. 1
point
Pure science, fully removed from political, religious, and social considerations would, rather than being a tool for politics, make politics its own tool. However, I've read too much about scientists being afraid to speak their minds for fear of the funding ramifications; besides which, far too many politicians - and, by extension, the public - seem to think they are more entitled to critique the validity of science regarding its implications on their beliefs than science is to critique them. That is not an atmosphere of progress, but a damning of progress. Until scientists are finally worshiped as gods (I fear I need to express here that this is hyperbole: rhetoric, and not to be taken seriously), and Darwin is elevated to the top of Mt Olympus, we'll be stuck in this backwater hillbilly den of liars we're in now. 1
point
1
point
1
point
Politicians can't keep people "in line" without lies. At least, not in the line the politician wants them to be in. There are no "lies" in science I'm not saying there is. Instead, there is lies about what is science. If I met a politician who calls climate change a hoax, I would spit on them. Once proven , they will be accepted So you might think. Evolution. That's the problem with religion .... there has been no proof for centuries. Nor was there ever proof centuries ago. It is simply superstition in the minds of fearful little mankind. No politicians can and should keep people in line without lies.As we know telling a lie is not law abiding and by lies he/she is keeping the society or running the society in the wrong way/path.There never be a lie in what is science as science is all proved with theories. Once will be accepted because a proof is accepted only when it right. |
