ah i thought you referred to philosophical existentialism

Loads of ways, one obvious example is the work toward prevention of embryonic stem cell research.

This post was edited by Voyaging on Sep 27 2014 06:42pm

I agree. It is worse. In the short term. But if it works it will be of great benefit in the long term. I don't think religion will be the cause of our extinction, though of course it's possible. i think it is of detriment to the overall quality of life of humanity and I think it is detrimental to our social and technological evolution. In short it has outlived it's usefulness and is now a hindrance... to put it mildly.



You seem angry. Maybe you should calm the fuck down before you break out in hives.

Sterilisation does not directly kill the subject and nor does it stop their ability to enjoy a healthy sex life. They simply cannot reproduce. I've never once said it was a good solution or even a morally acceptable solution. I think it's an awful thing. I just think it's the best possible option.

I believe religion must be exterminated for the good of the human race. It's a conclusion I've come to over many years. I'm simply working backwards from that.

Which wouldn't cause some existential catastrophe....

What else? It's a popular atheist slogan but it doesn't really have any validity, especially in the modern age.

This is a very good point. Progressing too quickly could be very risky.

I've often thought of America as a country that gained great economic, technological and military power in a very short time but that never caught up intellectually or socially. But I also think religion holds a huge part of the blame for that.

Technological progress, by-and-large, tends to be holistic, so for example, embryonic stem cell research leads may lead to improvements in human understanding of various aspects of biology, which may include neural function, which may lead to development of sophisticated AGI via reverse engineering of the brain, which may lead to humans go extinct. Science and technology, over the past decade or so, have become increasingly multidisciplinary.

Obviously this very specific linear trajectory is unlikely, but the point is that many research opportunities, and embryonic stem cell research in particular, offer understanding of areas we can't predict.

There are, of course, other areas of research which religion directly or indirectly hinders.

Not angry whatsoever

...Just viewed another thread and you seemed a big more intelligent than with the nonsense you are spewing around in this one.

"best possible option"
How about you let it continue to die out in modern western cultures as it already is?
You're not even able to handle the heat that would come along with your wishes XD

Bit of a stretch.

Religion doesn't hinder technological progress, and it really never has, apart from a few examples.

I completely agree that religion has been a hugely beneficial factor in scientific and technological progress for a large portion of human history.

In recent times, though, this has changed (embryonic stem cell research being the prototypical example; anesthetics were originally adamantly rejected by the religious while now their non-use during surgery would be considered barbaric).

There's also the indirect influence; the devoutly religious in general are less likely to seek a career in the STEM disciplines (I'm aware there are many devoutly religious people who are preeminent scientists, Francis Collins as the premier example).

I wouldn't say many... just a few high profile ones. High profile because the religious like to tout them as examples of how religion doesn't hinder science when they are but exceptions to the rule. As you said - in general the more fundamentalist you are in your beliefs the less likely you are to contribute anything meaningful to the world of science and to a lesser degree medicine.



Lol. I wrote out a massive reply about how wrong you are but decided not to bother. I rlly can't be arsed to discuss it with someone as closed minded as you.