I can't help but think how much further along we would be technically if the Dark Ages didn't occur.
The church suppressed all science that didn't agree with biblical scripture.
Could we have another Dark Ages?
While there are hard line fundamentalists in any religion there is always a possibility.
2007-11-07 17:57:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sometimes we need superstition just to maintain some sense of optimism in a world that is not always very easy to deal with. But your question presupposes that science is always right and anything else is wrong, which,given the track record of science, is ridiculous. So much of what we are taught is fact because science says so, is new ..too new to have been really thoroughly tested;many of the facts we are taught are in fact only theories waiting to be proved or disproved.
As for the little girl..without sharing her people's beliefs, how can science possibly know if she was the reincarnation of a goddess or not? Simply because they have worked out how her physical condition came about and have rectified it does not mean that there was nothing more behind it than sheer chance! But even if there had been, the superstition of her people would have ensured that this child was cared for and supported through what would have been a terrible life if her parents had not had access to modern medicine so don't mock.
Many people believe in many things because they see what they consider to be evidence of the supernatural around them..scientists believe in dark matter because they can not find any!
2007-11-07 12:57:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by selina.evans 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
In my opinion as a Christian with a scientific education, the faith needs more thinkers and scientists to take it seriously and to correct some crazy interpretations which have been put onto the ancient texts. I also think that science and philosophy need more practitioners who understand spiritual matters and who understand what to do for the common good of mankind, even if that involves some personal sacrifices. For example, I think there was a German scientist in WW2 who may have deliberately prevented his country from acquiring the nuclear bomb. Science and religion were originally almost inseparable. But, after centuries of conflict, science and religion were divorced in the 19th century. Religion was correctly ridiculed by scientists because it had become bigoted. But now, even science is loosing its heroic image and many see the technologies being developed by the biological and physical sciences as a threat to our existence. Personally, I think science and faith can achieve more for humanity by working together than apart. Given a little more mutual respect, a dialogue could be started. What do you think?
2016-04-03 01:02:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
i agree with the first answer.
there's nothing inherently dangerous about religion; social interactions developed around religion.
as far as religion as a threat to science, in this day and age i think there are enough people on both sides of the table and many more who consider both sides of the story.
on one end of the spectrum you have religious zealots. on the other you have hardcore believers in science. these two will always be in contention.
in the middle you have all the people who may or may not have religious beliefs, but can put those aside to think rationally about scientific discoveries. it's this group who prevent science from being killed by religion.
2007-11-07 12:42:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
At present, not very, as long as science has funding! Many people have very crap lives and need to believe that there is something more out there, they need to believe that their suffering is not in vain and that there is a better, happier place to move on to. Faith is a great thing, if you have it; and gives many people a great deal of strength to deal with adversities in their lives. Personally, not so sure, kinda wish I had that much faith at times, but at the end of the day, at this point in time, science has proven too much up to date to be ousted completely, but I think there will always have to be room for a little bit of faith. Absolutes in either direction would have a seriously detrimental effect on our existence, you've got to have room to dream.
2007-11-07 13:01:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
War is the continuation of diplomacy (i.e. politics) by other means; not the continuation of theology by other means.
Dangerous to science? Well science seems to be getting along pretty well to me. Dangerous to our existence? No more than any other world view which has the potential to tail off into fanaticism.
2007-11-07 15:51:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is human nature, as you said, and it influences science *directly* - many scientists get caught up in their own beleifs, and are unable to change when new evidence comes forward. It is something that we have to recognize in all of us, and when the time comes to be objective, we have to try to avoid these thought patterns.
Is it dangerous? Ask those who died in the Inquisition, or the Crusades. You bet it is.
2007-11-07 12:41:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by Junie 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The tendency to believe in supernatural fictions is not dangerous until it is allowed to infiltrate positions of great authority. Then it can become quite dangerous.
2007-11-07 12:36:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by lithiumdeuteride 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
most wars are started by religious beliefs
2007-11-07 13:05:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by idac123 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown
2007-11-07 13:01:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by Brant 7
·
0⤊
0⤋