What is physical need? It's all theological. Infanticide, euthanasia, cancer treatment for octogenarians, fertility treatment for 37+ year old women, elective surgery, antibiotics for minor infections, psychologists, psychopharmaceuticals, everything.
The History of modern science has been a success to just the extent that we did in fact acheive that
-
-
I'm very skeptical. Modern science is (most often) done in the academy, and the academy is a religious institution with its own theology and dogma, and plenty of politics. How many decent, testable hypotheses have been rolled out in the last few decades compared to cash spent?
-
Plenty of research takes place in industry, and STEM has largely until now been insulated from the religious aspects of the Cathedral. What testable hypotheses? I could point to any technological development out of an abundance in recent times
-
What non - computer tech has advanced significantly in the last three decades? I'm looking at things like the LHC and physics in general (which is almost entirely religious nowadays). The whole "green energy" debacle, etc.
-
True there has been stagnation in some respects. If you're saying religion and science can't be separated though I'm not sure what your vision for science is?
-
It should be incorporated into a formalized local religion as appropriate (as should all elements of human endeavors). We're obfuscating our nature to ourselves under the current "rational" religion, which diminishes what little agency we have in the first place.
-
I agree humans need a religious outlet but keep it separate from govt science etc. I'm sure when you pick a doctor you judge on medical competence alone not religion
-
That's what most people believe.
-
Most people believe in the separation of religion and science? You almost persuadeth me to be a demotist
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.