Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Augi
The reason "religious truths" often are criticized, from my observations, is because many "truths" are not open to interpretation, there is no room for observation. When religion makes the headlines it is because some shit has hit the fan. This occurs when people strictly adhere to beliefs, instead of taking from their books the good that is to be taught.
|
"Truths" not open to interpretation? No room for observation? Well, that isn't what they're meant for. "Truths" are meant to be the tools used to interpret the world through observation. It's supposed to be the other way around. However, you might be referring to dogma as opposed to the "truth," the latter which is often confirmed by observation and experience. Dogma is meant to teach, but it is also easily corruptible, which makes it open to criticism when it is used as a source of power to exploit others. This is the danger of religion; this is religion's delusion.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Augi
I agree with roach, that science is no means of justifying or renouncing religious beliefs.
|
Would this be akin to using the scientific method to gauge good and evil?