Richard Dawkins cautioned in sperating "religion" in our common sense


送交者: mangolasi 于 2005-9-14, 11:22:19:

回答: 大伙儿扯杂了。其实争论的焦点是:“信仰基督教是否限制人类对自然界的认识和探索。” 由 Latino2 于 2005-9-14, 10:38:55:

into 2 categories: organized religion and religious belief. His critics which lead to the "anti-religion" reputation, focus on but not limite to the former, while I don't go further (save some teasing when in bad mood) than the former.

Anyway, it's difficult to deny organized religions (Christianity/Islam/Judaism in particular) have the tendency of either brainwashing/indoctrinating/being sensational, i.e. being anti-intellectual, or if being intellectual like the Scholastic, leading the believer into more metaphysical thinking. The latter might not be bad as it might also foster mathematics/logic/philosophy/arts/music. At least mathematics/logic can be useful in investigating the nature.

But in a pragmatic point of view, religion is not "useful" or even a obstacle for science in general: science doesn't only need abstract model but also emprircal evidence. Religion is offering not help by teaching people either disregarding/being contemptous on evidence, or being too absorded into the abstract world without having the link to the reality. Religions are usually more keen on promoting the "first principle" and "a piror" way of thinking. Not neccessarily bad for all people, but lacking the ability of self-evolution which is the very essense of good science.



笔名: 密码(可选项): 注册笔名请按这里