[Newsbot]

Title: Science will win out over religion, says Hawking
Category: Science
Posted By: wildrosegirl
Date: 2010-06-07 17:10:14

[KorbenDeck]

I doubt it, I think religion will win out and kill us all.

[Lemmy]

I think science will kill us all, with or without religion.

[Arctic_Menace]

With the current state of affairs and seeing how they're deteriorating, I think religion will win out unfortunately.

[Public_Domain]

[xerxes]

If it was a level palying field, science should win, but it's not, so it won't.

[angler57]

KorbenDeck KorbenDeck:

I doubt it, I think religion will win out and kill us all.

How Sad.

Nothing to believe in and much to dislike and disagree with.

[Guy_Fawkes]

angler57 angler57:

KorbenDeck KorbenDeck:

I doubt it, I think religion will win out and kill us all.

How Sad.

Nothing to believe in and much to dislike and disagree with.

Thats the fault of a dogma that is resitant to fluid change.

[QBall]

I think Hawking is not looking at things from the common man's perspective (too much ivory tower living). Once upon a time science was pretty simple. Everything was made out of fire, earth, wind or water or a combination thereof. It was wrong, but the common man could understand this concept and took comfort in it as it helped them understand the world around them beyond what religion could provide. Then science advanced from four elements to the atom to the elements to molecules to quarks etc. While this means greater understanding of our world it also meant greater complexity to the point where the common man finds it too confusing to understand. What comfort can a plumber take when the people at CERN discover a new particle that exists for a fraction of a second? It has reached the point where only 1% of 1% of 1% of the world's population understands it anymore. Do you really think Al Gore could have spread his propaganda if he had just asked a scientist to compile the data so he can release it in a manual for people to read? Nope. He had to make a dazzling dog and pony show in order to bring it down to the common man's level. So science is a form of religion. The scientists are the high priests. Numbers are their dogma. They ridicule those who do not believe as being ignorant. However on the other side of the coin we have religion, who preaches a constant message that the common man can understand. Some preach that there's a man up in the sky who loves us and watches out for us (whether it's true or not is inherently irrelevant because it gives the common man comfort that someone is looking out for them). This is why religion will never die. It offers a sense of belonging and community that science will never be able to offer.
Science is way more dangerous than religion ever could be. Religion that goes to far can be dealt with (assuming the will to deal with it exists). Science must always progress, it must always move forward. Scientists today must make their mark by taking a concept and pushing it to it's extreme, because someone before them already did 'X', so they must do 'X+1'. Unfortunately it's these extremes that, I fear, will cause our demise one day.

[angler57]

Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:

angler57 angler57:

KorbenDeck KorbenDeck:

I doubt it, I think religion will win out and kill us all.

How Sad.

Nothing to believe in and much to dislike and disagree with.

Thats the fault of a dogma that is resitant to fluid change.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Must remember one persons dogma is anothers belief system. You describe a dogma perfectly, resistant to change.
Believe either disease or our own foolish behavior will end us.
With or without the help of science or dogma. Humans and/or society has, it appears, always had a death wish.

Nice cowboy suite in your profile. You need to stop by Tootsies in Nashville for a cool and refreshing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SHe_IfAGyk

[Regina]

Depends on what religion.

[Guy_Fawkes]

QBall QBall:

I think Hawking is not looking at things from the common man's perspective (too much ivory tower living). Once upon a time science was pretty simple. Everything was made out of fire, earth, wind or water or a combination thereof. It was wrong, but the common man could understand this concept and took comfort in it as it helped them understand the world around them beyond what religion could provide. Then science advanced from four elements to the atom to the elements to molecules to quarks etc. While this means greater understanding of our world it also meant greater complexity to the point where the common man finds it too confusing to understand. What comfort can a plumber take when the people at CERN discover a new particle that exists for a fraction of a second? It has reached the point where only 1% of 1% of 1% of the world's population understands it anymore. Do you really think Al Gore could have spread his propaganda if he had just asked a scientist to compile the data so he can release it in a manual for people to read? Nope. He had to make a dazzling dog and pony show in order to bring it down to the common man's level. So science is a form of religion. The scientists are the high priests. Numbers are their dogma. They ridicule those who do not believe as being ignorant. However on the other side of the coin we have religion, who preaches a constant message that the common man can understand. Some preach that there's a man up in the sky who loves us and watches out for us (whether it's true or not is inherently irrelevant because it gives the common man comfort that someone is looking out for them). This is why religion will never die. It offers a sense of belonging and community that science will never be able to offer.
Science is way more dangerous than religion ever could be. Religion that goes to far can be dealt with (assuming the will to deal with it exists). Science must always progress, it must always move forward. Scientists today must make their mark by taking a concept and pushing it to it's extreme, because someone before them already did 'X', so they must do 'X+1'. Unfortunately it's these extremes that, I fear, will cause our demise one day.

I'm quite sure he was talking about fundamental religion, not casual religion which most practice. Scientis only ridicule those who refuse to understand basic concepts, not those who have difficulty. The concept of evolution is not hard to comprehend, but still people will say things like "People are getting smaller as time goes on, how is that a benificial mutation? Thats why evolution doesnt work!"

[BartSimpson]

Anymore, too much science is indistinguishable from religion so what's the point of the question anyway?

[Guy_Fawkes]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Anymore, too much science is indistinguishable from religion so what's the point of the question anyway?

Yes one is founded on reason and logic, and the other on mythical stories which have been translated through several dead languages. They are EXACTLY alike.

[andyt]

$1:

The British scientist, who has built his career studying the universe and its origins, flat-out rejected creationism and the possibility of a creator.

"What could define God (is thinking of God) as the embodiment of the laws of nature. However, this is not what most people would think of that God," Hawking, 68, told Sawyer.

"They made a human-like being with whom one can have a personal relationship. When you look at the vast size of the universe and how insignificant an accidental human life is in it, that seems most impossible."

It's the usual straw man of the atheists using old style monotheism and calling it religion as if that covers the whole spectrum. I think many people are comfortable with the idea of calling the organizing principle of the universe God.

As for the personal relationship, to think of God as a guy in the sky seems pretty infantile to me. But recognizing that there seems to be an intelligence in the universe, and that our consciousness is a part of that, and can allow us to experience this overarching intelligence is another matter. Quantum physics certainly seems big on the observers role in collapsing the waveform into the particular.