Atheists often mention the harm that religion has caused in
the world, and the common rebuttal to this is, “science has done just as much
harm”. The arguments against science range from the obvious nuclear weapons to the
less obvious oil and gas which create pollution and contribute to climate
change. To decide if science and religion are both equally responsible for harm,
it is important to look at the claims both are making.
There are thousands of different religions and all of them
make different claims, however they all basically make the same claim which is
that it improves the quality of our lives. It attempts to do this by giving us
moral guidelines to live by, and more often than not the religion claims that
these morals are given to us by the creator of the universe.
Science however, doesn't make claims and unlike religion
there is only one scientific method and it was created by men to help us better
understand the world around us. The scientific method includes: formulating
a question, hypothesis, prediction, test, and then analyzing the data. While
science doesn't make claims, scientists do, and when claims are made they can
be tested by others using this same method.
The difference between both of these is that one is making a
claim and the other is a tool to investigate how the universe works. A method for
understanding cannot be guilty of harm but those who use science for evil of course can
be.
Religion is often used to justify harmful acts, but you
can’t say the same for science. Science has never been used to justify acts of
violence even though science may have been used to cause the act. It is similar
to the argument “guns don’t kill people - people do”; anyone who has used that
argument can’t also say that science is as much to blame for harm as religion,
because like guns, science doesn't harm people - people who use science for evil do. Science works and it is our responsibility to use it responsibly.
Religion doesn't work, and when it doesn't - religious individuals
have used science to do what their god can’t. Those making the argument that
science is harmful - know that religion is guilty and project the same blame
onto science to somehow justify the continued belief in their own religion. If
both are equally guilty, then in their mind there is no reason to question
their own position and the debate is a draw. Arguing that science has caused
harm in the world is completely illogical, and anytime someone makes this claim - they expose the fact that they don’t value knowledge.
Interesting view point. However, I would point out that a vast majority of religions are peaceful or do not advocate violence. But religion, in itself, is simply a collection of ideas. Those ideas can no more harm others than science can. While it is true that atrocities have been committed over the centuries in the name of religion, I don't think it is fair to hold religion itself responsible for people's failure to apply it properly. In parallel, doctors have done inhumane human experiments for the advancement of science, but that does mean that science itself is to blame.
ReplyDeleteLike any set of beliefs, religion can be misinterpreted or misapplied. At its core, religion is an attempt to find meaning in life or obtain a sense of spirituality. It could even be argued that science is a religion, as the scientist desires and pursues knowledge in a quest for understanding. However, it cannot be denied that in the practice of certain religions, harm is inflicted upon others. But again, that is not the fault of religion but the fault of the practitioners.
Ultimately, neither science nor religion are responsible for harm in the world.
Ideas can no more harm others than science can? What about ideas such as you should stone people for being a homosexual, kill those who leave Islam, attack countries that don't worship your god, you can sell your daughter into slavery. All of these ideas can be found in either the Bible or Quran.
ReplyDeleteBoth Christianity and Islam condone this behavior, and because they do - religion is responsible along with the individuals who commit these acts. This is not a case of people's failure to apply their religion properly. In fact the ones who do these things are the ones applying it properly and those who don't are not. People are not good because of their religion, they are good despite it.
Your example of doctors is not parallel, I'm not sure what experiments you are referring to, but experiments done on humans are done with that person’s willingness to be tested on, and many times these experiments make discovers that help others.
If someone wants to argue that science is a religion they would be wrong. Science is simply a way of investigating the world, understanding reality is not a religion.
Well, for an obvious example of unwilling human experimentation we need look no farther than Nazi Germany. While many people were tortured for no other reason than sadistic intent, there were experiments done for scientific reasons. The Nazis conducted gruesome experiments to test the effectiveness of sulfonamide. Other experiments were done with the goal of advancing the armed forces. As you might simply reject any Nazi scientific experiment as pure cruelty with no scientific goal, here are a few others:
ReplyDelete1) Project MKUltra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA)
2) Project 4.1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_4.1)
3) The Tuskegee syphilis experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study)
If you're really interested in reading more, just check out wikipedia or Google. All these experiments were carried out with a scientific goal, making science itself responsible for the harm inflicted on the unwilling participants.
Furthermore, you reveal your bias by defining the idea of religion by Christianity and Islam. I would personally suggest adding Judaism to the list of atrocious religions based on the amount of hateful violence carried out in the Torah's name. But remember your Venn diagram; Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are subsets of religion. Religion is a broad concept, encompassing both violent expressions (such as those already mentioned) and non-violent expressions such as Buddhism or Taoism.
I would suggest understanding the concepts of what you're trying to condemn. Simply equating Christianity/Islam with religion because they are the two most prolific religions is a gross misrepresentation. If you want to state that Christianity and Islam are responsible for reprehensible acts, I won't argue with you. But just as I do not view Science as ultimately responsible for the aforementioned human experimentation, you should not condemn the concept of religion based on the actions of several types.
Science and religion don't cause harm. It's the people who interprets them in the wrong way that causes harm.
ReplyDeleteLet's not forget the atrocities carried out by communists in the 20th century, in the absence of science. The number of victims of communism in the last 100 years outweighs the number of victims of any of the Abrahamic religions.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry. I meant to say "in the absence of religion"
Deletehttp://wellspentjourney.wordpress.com/2013/10/01/devastating-arguments-against-christianity-courtesy-of-the-internet/
ReplyDeleteHi Ted, the link below should take you to a 2011 article which was published in a peer reviewed academic journal. The author condenses 12 years worth of historical analysis and statistical research and summarizes his findings concerning religion (specifically Protestantism) and it's effects on the world. The results might surprise you. http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic965299.files/Woodberry%20APSR%202011.pdf
ReplyDelete