Thursday 18 October 2012

Religion vs Science

I don’t enjoy Ricky Gervais’s TV shows, but his Twitter feed is pure genius:

image

5 comments:

the drunken watchman said...



Love it. That's almost PC standard :)

Anonymous said...

what else has science given us?

oh, thats right: chemical weapons, gas chambers, the atomic bomb...

golly, how may deaths can be chalked up to all those wonderfull scientific achievments?

Anonymous said...

"Science" did not "give us" that jump: it mostly human pluck, courage and engineering, which is not the same thing as science at all, gave us that jump.

It is absurd to claim this. Science is a methodology--a mode of inquiry--and nothing more in and of itself. It is like saying that observatories give us astrophysics.

What you indulge in here is not Science but scientism.

Science is morally neutral and does not speak to the same issues at all--in deed it cannot. Science is not concerned with meaning. Science can tell us at what the temperature water boils at; it cannot tell us what this means.

If there is a "point" to this post it is a rather obtuse and juvenile one. It most certainly misses entirely what fundamental roles religion has played in the course of Mankind's history and how it has advanced his consciousness.

Certainly with out the logical tradition of Scholasticism and the foundation of universities there would have been no modern science at all. (and please spare us the usual slanders about the Church and Galileo)

So the statement is not merely a strange philosophical error: it is an historical one as well.

the drunken watchman said...


scholasticism? ooooh .... talk about abstruse, Trev

you probably got a cute title for your reasoning also, the type which tells an injured motorist that ambulances are not necessarily good becasue sometimes they run someone over on the way to the hospital :)

Argus said...


Wow~! Your post is the briefest most accurate statement on the eternal issue ... ever.

Predictable knees jerked, though. 'Twas ever thus: don't stop.