Quote:Original post by The Frugal Gourmet
However, I'm not sure I agree with your last paragraph. Religions frequently revise beliefs to accomodate reality, and I don't agree that religion is the cause of superstition, conflict, or persecution.

Mainstream religions do sometimes revise their official line when it becomes sufficiently at odds with reality to threaten their ability to maintain their congregation. Religion is not the root cause of superstition, conflict and persecution. Human nature is the root cause of those things (and of the existence of religion itself). Religion tends to exaggerate those aspects of human nature however. It's true that religion can also amplify positive aspects of human nature (charity, community, even tolerance and cooperation in some cases). My personal opinion is that religion does more harm than good but that's a very difficult assertion to prove one way or another.

That's probably because you don't understand the difference between scientific 'belief' (accepting the current best explanation until evidence comes along to the contrary) and religious belief (believing what was written in some book thousands of years ago or what you're told by some religious leader despite any amount of evidence to the contrary).

It never ceases to amaze me how many people seem incapable of understanding such a simple concept.

Book of Job. Prayer ain't necessarily going to make God be all nicey nice to you. Divine plan and all that. Impossible to comprehend by mortals, yadda yadda.

More importantly, how much did this stupid study cost? Why doesn't that brain trust donate the money to cancer research or something that's actually useful that someone might actually care about? Seriously, how many devout religious type folks are going to see this study and go, "well daaaaaanngg. Why we been wasting all this time praying?" Give me a break.

Quote:Original post by Cold_Steel
Book of Job. Prayer ain't necessarily going to make God be all nicey nice to you. Divine plan and all that. Impossible to comprehend by mortals, yadda yadda.

Yeah, he's a capricious son of a bitch. Based on the book of Job you might also say vindictive, sadistic and petty. If he did exist I wouldn't want anything to do with him.

Quote:Original post by mattnewport
Mainstream religions do sometimes revise their official line when it becomes sufficiently at odds with reality to threaten their ability to maintain their congregation. Religion is not the root cause of superstition, conflict and persecution. Human nature is the root cause of those things (and of the existence of religion itself). Religion tends to exaggerate those aspects of human nature however. It's true that religion can also amplify positive aspects of human nature (charity, community, even tolerance and cooperation in some cases). My personal opinion is that religion does more harm than good but that's a very difficult assertion to prove one way or another.

Ironically, I think you are being extremely un-Scientific here.

Ok, so it's your genuine belief that religions change only because it threatens their "ability to maintain their congregation". That's pretty much as editorialized a statement as you can make. So, it's your educated opinion that religions change to maintain power or control. How do I know that there isn't some alternative reason? Like, perhaps religions change because they happen to be made up of thinking human beings with the capacity to embrace new ideas. Or perhaps there are 100 complex reasons involved. Basically, you're B.S.-ing. And doing so, ironically, in defense of Science.

Also, I'm skeptical on your other theory that religion necessarily amplifies the evils of human nature. Seems like another editorialized and un-Scientific statement to me. To prove such a thing, you must show more than a correlation between religion and the less desirable aspects of human nature -- you must show causation. But I'm not even sure you can provide the correlation. I can easily think of a-religious societies or social movements with little moral superiority to religious ones -- Nazism, Stalinist Russia, China today. I don't even need an experiment for that bit of evidence.

If you want to get all smug about Science, for the love of God (the guy who keeps the masses superstitious, stupid, and belligerant) do so in a manner that's not ridiculously illogical and un-Scientific. Please.

Quote:Original post by The Frugal Gourmet

Quote:Original post by mattnewport
Mainstream religions do sometimes revise their official line when it becomes sufficiently at odds with reality to threaten their ability to maintain their congregation. Religion is not the root cause of superstition, conflict and persecution. Human nature is the root cause of those things (and of the existence of religion itself). Religion tends to exaggerate those aspects of human nature however. It's true that religion can also amplify positive aspects of human nature (charity, community, even tolerance and cooperation in some cases). My personal opinion is that religion does more harm than good but that's a very difficult assertion to prove one way or another.

Ironically, I think you are being extremely un-Scientific here.

Ok, so it's your genuine belief that religions change only because it threatens their "ability to maintain their congregation". That's pretty much as editorialized a statement as you can make. So, it's your educated opinion that religions change to maintain power or control. How do I know that there isn't some alternative reason? Like, perhaps religions change because they happen to be made up of thinking human beings with the capacity to embrace new ideas. Or perhaps there are 100 complex reasons involved. Basically, you're B.S.-ing. And doing so, ironically, in defense of Science.

Also, I'm skeptical on your other theory that religion necessarily amplifies the evils of human nature. Seems like another editorialized and un-Scientific statement to me. To prove such a thing, you must show more than a correlation between religion and the less desirable aspects of human nature -- you must show causation. But I'm not even sure you can provide the correlation. I can easily think of a-religious societies or social movements with little moral superiority to religious ones -- Nazism, Stalinist Russia, China today. I don't even need an experiment for that bit of evidence.

If you want to get all smug about Science, for the love of God (the guy who keeps the masses superstitious, stupid, and belligerant) do so in a manner that's not ridiculously illogical and un-Scientific. Please.

I don't see that mattnewport was trying to be scientific at all. At any rate, when comparing the secular atrocities of the 20th century with religious atrocities of previous centuries, remember to bear in mind the vast population differences between centuries as well as the vast differences in military fire power - industrial warfare is a far different beast than feudal warfare.

With regard to the healing power of prayer, it seems to me that prayer, in as much as it is similar to meditation, might work for the individual doing the praying. This isn't to say that God listens to the individual's prayer and responds, but that deep prayer, like deep mediation, might provide a healing benefit as it brings the body into alignment with the mind or some such. I've seen documentaries about studying the brains of meditating Tibetan monks and praying monastic nuns and it's possible that there might be tangible benefits to the effort.