Religion, Do you think it hinder potential?

I do not want to attack anybody, but the Church (Any) seems to hinder change.

I don't see why it would. Go to any history class and you'll see that religion is the reason for a lot of the advancements we enjoy and have experienced to this day. The Catholic Church is responsible for the first scientific churches established inEastern and Western Europe. Gregor Mendel, a christian monk, is the father of genetics and is the main reason we have that scientific field as well as making significant additions to it. Ever heard of the Punnet square. Muslim scientists in Spain and North Africa contributed to Navigation (Compass etc.) and even Mathematics. They made libraries for the public to enjoy. Lot's of religious people from the 13th and 14th century didn't see science as a way to bar them from god but bring them closer. A majority of scientists back then were religous. Catholic scientists invented the concepts of relative motion, curvature of light, heliocentrism, and even down to the first correct explanation for a rainbow. Being religous didn't stop them so I wouldn't see how it would be a hindrance to today's society. Forgot to mention that religion has also been the inspiration of lots of plays in theater and controversial art.

...lol

no

If the churches weren't there we'd find something also to pause ourselves with. It isn't the churches it's the Arrogant nosiness of those irrational members that stop us...hell most religions teach tolerance(with some contradictions here and there.)

Yes.

Historically no? Modern days yes.

Tch, religion is also responsible for many, many evils. People didn't know any better than to choose religion. And the animosity between religion and science is well known. Take Galileo for instance. Ever heard of him? Nowadays, we've taken the knowledge from religious people (which was not influenced by religion in any way btw) and our society today has moved on from needing religion as a fundamental part to it. It hangs around like a bad smell lingering longer than it should do.

NO.

@lvenger: the Galileo example is one of the few times when science has directly been hindered by just religion.

Other times, there have other reasons along with religion that hindered the progression of science.

Religion is the cause of many evils? I think you mean corrupt, religious people are the cause of many evils, not religion itself. I believe the final two crusades were mainly about reclaiming Constantinople as an important trading hub, but it was extremely easy to use religion to coerce people. Politics with a religious "flavor."

Scientists helped create the very machines that contribute to polluted environments, guns, and atomic bombs. But science itself is not problematic. It's the natural progression of society.

Both science and religion have their benefits and negatives. There's also racism, ethics (which stop some areas of science), greed, politics and much more.

@oblivionknight: It's religion that is the root of the cause though since it is the tool by which those corrupt individuals have subdued the masses and maintained their authority. It can hardly be said to be truly beneficial in the light of modern advancements from science and our ever expanding knowledge. Science can be a tool for evil but nowadays, it's mostly checked as a force for good. The same cannot be said for religion.

Seems like you have never heard of witch-hunt nor the medieval inquisition.

That being said, it shouldn't since the renaissance.

@lvenger:

Galileo was inspired by religion when going after his findings. In fact, he wanted to be a monk before his father made him change his mind. What people seem to forget is that Galileo wasn't put on house arrest because of his findings. In fact a lot of Church scientists agreed with him and his books were met with excitement and critical acclaim. He was put on house arrest because he said the bible shouldn't be interpreted too literally when talking to a noble. Just wanted to clear that up.

Lots of scientific discoveries were inspiredmby religion.

Galileo wanted to spy into the heavens when he made the telescope

Darwin (who was religous) wanted to find the workings of god in animals

Max Planck (founder of Quantum mechanics) said that both religion and science require a belief in god

John Boyd Orr litterally included religion as his inspiration in his Nobel prize speech

Arthur Shalow (Physicist) when interviewed about his work included that he finds a need for god in the universe and his own life

Granted this doesn't happen as often nowadays, I'm just saying the two don't clash.

As for the animosity between science and religion, that hasn't always existed, people create that.

The rest of the things seem opinionated so I won't comment on that

nonononono nooo way

@lvenger: No, the corrupt individuals are the root cause of the problem. If they weren't there to exploit the masses, then the problems wouldn't arise. Religion is simply the tool they used. Currently, there are things OTHER than religion that can be used to motivate people into fighting with one another.

You're saying that science is now kept in check. For the most part, religion is too. I haven't seen any Inquisitions or Holy wars recently. Places like the Middle East would be violent even if there was no religion, especially if everyone maintained differing opinions on matters. Within Africa, there are genocides and civil wars, yet (to my knowledge) none of them are caused by religion.

Religion and Ancient Greece religion wasn't connected in anyway. However most religions you find in the present day western society has both historical and today been hinder of change.

Yes I do and it has and it continues to do so.

Religion impedes on peoples lives, it harms those who may not be a part of it, either in religious related attacks or wars, or it limits equality and peoples rights. There is also a great deal of focus on censoring peoples view points that oppose religion or criticize it. And that is not even to mention how it holds back social and scientific advancement and change.

But not only that it also vastly limits the people who follow a particular religions ideology. Its lists of rule regulations and boundaries were concocted a few thousand years ago yet people still follow it to the letter. Largely by fear which is helped by a nice dose of ignorance and misunderstanding. Someone only need post a picture of Charles Darwin in the christian comic readers thread only for them to react vehemently and insist they are a troll, for simply posting a picture someone who published the theory of evolution. That tidbit in itself of how much misunderstanding and ignorance goes on against one of the most profound and important structures of knowledge of our entire history should show how much damage religion has dealt to not only potential but knowledge, understanding and so much more.

And why? Because it might well contradict what their bile or other religious text might say.

Religion is in favour of ignorance, intolerance, stupidity, control, delusion so yes of course it would be also against potential since potential brings progress.

@pfcoolio14: And many top scientists today are atheists. What does that tell you about our current state of knowledge that the most intelligent of us do not believe in any religion or God. Again, with Galileo, it was because of what he said against the Church that caused him to suffer as a result.

@oblivionknight Religion is a tool used to garner ignorance, intolerance and control of the masses. Its creation stems from humanity and it is a hinderance to what we are capable of accomplishing. Ancient history shows that when religion was the dominating force, humanity suffered for relying on it. Religion isn't the force it was today but terrorism, bigotry to homosexuals, suppression of teaching factual knowledge to children and more are direct signs of religion being more of the problem.

First off I am not hating anyone, any single person at all. Second of all anytime I do criticize religion I do back up what I say with reasons why just like I have done so here.

I also do find it odd how you took my quote but took a paragraph out. Why do that? What is the point of that? Did you agree with me there or what?

How exactly am I putting people off coming here? I have not once tried to get a person off this forum or say they should not be here. How do I just hate? Where is the substance to back up your claim? I put a fair amount of thought into posts like the one above since I think out what I am saying and why I am saying it. I back it up with reasons why I think and feel that way.

Religion has not harmed me really personally but I see the harm it does cause to other people, but nothing I have said is anymore hateful than you or anyone else has said.

@lvenger:

That doesn't mean that Religion hinders potential so I don't see why you'd post that. But I'll entertain you.Galileo didn't say anything against the church, he disagreed with how the church interpreted the bible so he was put on house arrest. He himself said that everything in th bible had to be true but he said that they were interpreting it too literally when he was debating with a noble on his findings. This caused him to be put on house arrest but he was still able to continue his scientific studies. I suggest you read on Galileo some more because I'm getting the vibe you don't remember.

As for the whole scientists are atheists thing that's not true. That's just some rumour passed around without knowledge. The study you're probably referring to was the one done on the NSA. That was only on those 2, 000 scientists within that group while there are more than 2 million scientists in America. A more accurate survey was done by the Pew research center in 2010 on all scientists in America and it turned out 51% believed in some higher power or were religous.

I don't think it does, I know it does.

First, for me yes. Second I've met plenty of Christians that are just as dismissive hateful towards the concept of Atheism as he seems to be towards religion.

As to your comment about the Ancient Greeks being religious and making scientific advancements I really don't see exactly how that matters. It's not like the two were used together hand and hand to learn information about the world. They happened to practice a religion, also exactly what scientific advancements did they actually make?

They were not the united nation that people learn from most history books today There was no singular Greece, it was broken up into many different groups and not united at all in the slightest as war always broke out between each other almost constantly. It was also not a period of enlightenment and advancement of knowledge, Socrates was imprisoned and killed for his theories.

Yes I think it does. The fact that some deny the theory of evolution and the Big Bang because of it basicly proves my point.

It is not a question whatever you are religious or not but whatever religion is a hinder. A religion has many times historical been a hinder for innovation.

He? I have a username for a reason you know.

I have good reason to be dismissive of religion and to dislike it. Does that mean I hate people who are religious? No I don't. Does that mean I think people should be forced to not be religious? hell no. I absolutely support a persons right to have whatever belief they want.

@pfcoolio14: Beleiving in a higher power and being religious is two compleatly different conceps. I beleive in a creator, but I do not beleive in any perticular religion because they are all illogical imo. IIRC only a small fraction of scientist on that list were religious too boot.

@lvenger: religion is also tool used for peace and unity. Not so one-sided.

Also, not every religious person has anything against homosexuals, exclude facts from their children, or are terrorists.

What's more, almost ALL major civilizations have had some religious structure to it, yet they somehow prospered. And, we look to then with admiration for their constructs, laws, and beliefs. Our very concepts of logic come from societies that were heavily religious.

@dccomicsrule2011:

If you want me to be more accurate to the study, then 50% of scientists were religious. 1% believed in a higher power as you say. 49% were atheists.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2010/04/13/are-top-scientists-really-so-atheistic-look-at-the-data#.UeVpYH23PMI

So a majority of the scientists across America are religous, not a "small fraction".

For what i read, many people blame religion so they dont have to blame people and human nature.

Saddly people need to blame something that is not people, because that means they should see themselves in a new light and stop the theory humans are pure and something made them evil an outsider force, its not that humans make their decisions and use anything they find to justify them.

@mrdecepticonleader: Lol, well you were in the quote so I figured you be informed lol.

I didn't say that they may hate an atheist but the entire concept of it which is exactly the same as a person hating the concept of christianity. I don't think @mrdecepticonleader Hate the concept or Christianity just disproves of how it can corrupt and be used to spread hateful ideas.

Socrates was killed for is different ways of thinking because it challenged the ideas of what was believed by the Ancient Greeks at that point in time. That's the point I was trying to make, Socrates was a free thinker and sent for execution for it. I'm saying that even in the ancient religious there was persecution of free thinkers and challengers of the set ideas in place. You also have Galileo in the Renaissance era threatened to death for his "blasphemes theories" so he retracted them.

Religion has held us back in the past as well and it still does in some cases, that said there are plenty of rational religious people who accept scientific theories like evolution and the big bang (terrible name for describing it and the term was used originally used by a scientist giving an example of how misleading the term was). They just incorporate the idea that God instigated the events. That idea is somewhat of a modern take that still allows the person to believe in God while also accepting modern thoughts. That I think is a more common type of religious practice then people realize. At least I'd like to think so.

I don't think I ever answered the question at hand. I do believe religion has hindered us, but so has politics, currency/ greed etc.

Historically all the great empires were built on the floor of their beliefs, from these empires came great advancements in architecture, math, and technology in general. If it wasn't for peoples beliefs pushing them forward we would still be tribal communities. We have examples of religion oppressing and just down right fucking shit up but that does not take away from the role it had in developing our modern world. No religion, no America, present day we see unfortunately peoples religious beliefs hinder human development, personally i'm not for or against religion, what ever floats your boat.

I never said he was an Atheist lol. As I understand it he drank hemlock tea in prison so he wouldn't have to be exicuted publicly. There is no way to know if that it is true that he believed he was dying for a "higher purpose" and I've never heard that before. As for not defending himself part of his beliefs were for non-violent actions.

@pfcoolio14: If you take away the atheist population of the USA, you lose over 90% of the countries top scientists and only 2% of its prison population. That was part of a statistical study on the matter. To ignore it and substitute your own one in that suits your argument demonstrates the flaws in your post.

@oblivionknight I'm not saying they do. But it's religion that can cause it. Its potential for these things is a far greater danger than a benefit to humanity at least

@pfcoolio14: Ah I see, that is why I said IIRC because I was not sure....In any case most of the most important scientist in the world are athiest/agnostic. I'm one of those guys that takes quality over quinity.

@lvenger:

I'm using this different, more accurate study from Oxford University because the people that conducted the other study admitted to not using a representative sample in their study. They only used the scientistsfrom the NSA and didn't encompass all the scientists in the United States. I'm not substituting my own research. This has been done twice and it was shown that 93% study was innacurate. It shown that the scientists population in the United states that were religious were either 50% or 51%. You should really look into stuff more before you respond. Did you even take the time out of your day to look at my link. It was supported by Oxford and Harvard.

@dccomicsrule2011:

Oh sorry, I don't know what IIRC means

@pfcoolio14: It was supported by Oxford and Harvard? Well that's a wrinkle I hadn't foreseen. Still, the more prominent, higher up scientists in the world have expressed non religious to atheistic beliefs. That's what's more important than the study. The so called 'scientists' in that study may have also been creationists too. I've seen far more videos than I should have where creationist 'scientists' let their beliefs cloud their scientific reasoning. Those are people who shouldn't be considered scientists at all.

@lvenger:

I get where you're coming from, but what I'm trying to put across is that it hasn't hindered society.

And as for the creationists thing, they only accounted for 1% in the study.

@infinite_doom: I can agree with this. Major powers are constructed from people coming together. The easiest way is for them to have common interests. Religion is probably the easiest way for this to take place.

mMmMmMMm bait.

hinder what kind of change? give some specifics if you can

Well I know Religion hindered my Sexual Activity... I mean there was a lot of chicks who I wanted to bone when I was a Christian... but because "Jeebus" said I can't bone any chicks unless I was married to them... I had to pass up the cooch... and that made me Mad ! Well until I started to do my own thing regardless of what that Ole Book of Violence, Magic, Love said.