Religious knowledge is explicitly less valuable than academic knowledge.
I’m not talking about christian, white people’s idea of manners and civilization. That is still awful. Instead of kidnapping, that’s what public schools should be for, teaching reading, writing, and science.
Those kidnappings were genocide. I advocate for religion to be suppressed, especially the sexist and racist ones(but not only), not for all forms of culture and tradition to be suppressed.
Well I will describe a religious belief I hold to you, and I’m eager to hear what you think of it.
Burning fossil fuels is a sin. We’re not supposed to dig them out of the ground and burn them. When fossil fuels are burned, they react and turn to greenhouse gases, which warm the planet and bring natural disasters. And because Elohim is a god of great wrath, the disasters do not just harm those who sinned, but everyone, and disproportionately the poorest who don’t have the resources to survive natural disaster. To find peace with the world around us, we must stop fossil fuel emissions and sacrifice our billionaires to Elohim upon a ritual pyre.
A great example on why religious knowledge is less valuable than scientific knowledge. The belief that the issues are that simple and blocks understanding of why it happens and how to prevent similar situations from recurring.
More however, the god parts have no value. If you insert science into religion, it’s still science. The science information should be extracted from the religious knowledge, and the less valuable religious parts discarded.
If you insert science into religion, it’s still science
And all religions have science in them. Pacific Islanders know things about wayfaring and wave dynamics that physicists are just now discovering. Colonisers in Australia spoiled the environment by disregarding indigenous conservation practices. Buddhists have been teaching western psychologists about the uses of meditation for the past two decades. The Haudenosaunee taught Karl Marx’s friends about communism. Muslims were avoiding dangerous meats before germ theory was invented. For hundreds of years, westerners have dismissed religious knowledge and said oopsie when they later learned there was science inside the religion. I caution you not to make the same mistake.
I’m appreciative that you’re entirely misunderstanding what I think should be happening in favor of writing your own narrative. I do not think that religious texts and oral histories should be erased. They should be studied. I think that religion deserves suppression. There will be no magical discoveries religious people make anymore. Most of that was likely not religious until they made it as such to get people to believe them in the first place.
The scientific information can and should be taken in. But, I explicitly said “less value” not no value in regards to religious knowledge, which you so kindly ignored, again to write your own narrative, one where you condescendingly assume I did not already know what you just stated
There will be no magical discoveries religious people make anymore
I implore you to consider the fact that every living culture on this earth is still changing, evolving, and growing, and even some dead religions have been revived. And these religions have access to the scientific method just as you do.
So unless you mean to imply that science is finished making discoveries, which I’m certain you don’t, then religions will keep making discoveries. The Buddhists are still improving their meditation techniques. The Pacific islanders are still training to be better wayfarers. The Australian Aboriginals are learning to care for a land ravaged by climate change.
Religions as dead things written in an old book is a western idea and I fear you have projected this onto distinctly nonwestern religions where truth comes from a connection to the ancestors and the land, constantly evolving as the people and the land evolve. And to nonwestern religions where truth comes from exploration of the mind, and surely you can see the mind is a highly dynamic environment in the modern day, ripe for fresh discoveries.
Religions are anti science. Any small advancements they may make on the side do not make up for the rest. But frankly, they aren’t making advancements on a religious basis.
Buddhists are still improving their meditation techniques. The Pacific islanders are still training to be better wayfarers.
They are not.
The Australian Aboriginals are learning to care for a land ravaged by climate change.
That’s science, not religion.
And these religions have access to the scientific method just as you do.
Which they are using in a scientific manner, and their use is not religious, and will not be changed by reducing religion.
If they are adding religion to it, it isn’t the scientific method.
Religions as dead things written in an old book is a western idea
I don’t think they’re dead, I think they have nothing to contribute to science that cannot be contributed to better by scientifically motivated people, who will remain as such religion or no. Again with you pushing your own narrative of what you want my opinions and statements to be.
And to nonwestern religions where truth comes from exploration of the mind, and surely you can see the mind is a highly dynamic environment in the modern day, ripe for fresh discoveries
Religions do not define where truth comes from. It comes from the same places in every place. It can come from the mind, or observation, and study. It’s ripe for discoveries and that has NOTHING to do with religion, of any sort.
Religious knowledge is explicitly less valuable than academic knowledge.
I’m not talking about christian, white people’s idea of manners and civilization. That is still awful. Instead of kidnapping, that’s what public schools should be for, teaching reading, writing, and science.
Those kidnappings were genocide. I advocate for religion to be suppressed, especially the sexist and racist ones(but not only), not for all forms of culture and tradition to be suppressed.
Well I will describe a religious belief I hold to you, and I’m eager to hear what you think of it.
Burning fossil fuels is a sin. We’re not supposed to dig them out of the ground and burn them. When fossil fuels are burned, they react and turn to greenhouse gases, which warm the planet and bring natural disasters. And because Elohim is a god of great wrath, the disasters do not just harm those who sinned, but everyone, and disproportionately the poorest who don’t have the resources to survive natural disaster. To find peace with the world around us, we must stop fossil fuel emissions and sacrifice our billionaires to Elohim upon a ritual pyre.
A great example on why religious knowledge is less valuable than scientific knowledge. The belief that the issues are that simple and blocks understanding of why it happens and how to prevent similar situations from recurring.
More however, the god parts have no value. If you insert science into religion, it’s still science. The science information should be extracted from the religious knowledge, and the less valuable religious parts discarded.
And all religions have science in them. Pacific Islanders know things about wayfaring and wave dynamics that physicists are just now discovering. Colonisers in Australia spoiled the environment by disregarding indigenous conservation practices. Buddhists have been teaching western psychologists about the uses of meditation for the past two decades. The Haudenosaunee taught Karl Marx’s friends about communism. Muslims were avoiding dangerous meats before germ theory was invented. For hundreds of years, westerners have dismissed religious knowledge and said oopsie when they later learned there was science inside the religion. I caution you not to make the same mistake.
I’m appreciative that you’re entirely misunderstanding what I think should be happening in favor of writing your own narrative. I do not think that religious texts and oral histories should be erased. They should be studied. I think that religion deserves suppression. There will be no magical discoveries religious people make anymore. Most of that was likely not religious until they made it as such to get people to believe them in the first place.
The scientific information can and should be taken in. But, I explicitly said “less value” not no value in regards to religious knowledge, which you so kindly ignored, again to write your own narrative, one where you condescendingly assume I did not already know what you just stated
I implore you to consider the fact that every living culture on this earth is still changing, evolving, and growing, and even some dead religions have been revived. And these religions have access to the scientific method just as you do.
So unless you mean to imply that science is finished making discoveries, which I’m certain you don’t, then religions will keep making discoveries. The Buddhists are still improving their meditation techniques. The Pacific islanders are still training to be better wayfarers. The Australian Aboriginals are learning to care for a land ravaged by climate change.
Religions as dead things written in an old book is a western idea and I fear you have projected this onto distinctly nonwestern religions where truth comes from a connection to the ancestors and the land, constantly evolving as the people and the land evolve. And to nonwestern religions where truth comes from exploration of the mind, and surely you can see the mind is a highly dynamic environment in the modern day, ripe for fresh discoveries.
Religions are anti science. Any small advancements they may make on the side do not make up for the rest. But frankly, they aren’t making advancements on a religious basis.
They are not.
That’s science, not religion.
Which they are using in a scientific manner, and their use is not religious, and will not be changed by reducing religion.
If they are adding religion to it, it isn’t the scientific method.
I don’t think they’re dead, I think they have nothing to contribute to science that cannot be contributed to better by scientifically motivated people, who will remain as such religion or no. Again with you pushing your own narrative of what you want my opinions and statements to be.
Religions do not define where truth comes from. It comes from the same places in every place. It can come from the mind, or observation, and study. It’s ripe for discoveries and that has NOTHING to do with religion, of any sort.