On May 8, 3:41 pm, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 5/8/2012 12:04 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> > On May 8, 2:17 pm, Evgenii Rudnyi<use...@rudnyi.ru>  wrote:
> >> On 07.05.2012 22:21 Craig Weinberg said the following:
> >>> On May 7, 3:37 pm, meekerdb<meeke...@verizon.net>    wrote:
> >> ...
> >>>> Sure science grew out of Christianity, out of the decay and 
> >>>> fragmentation of Christianity.
> >>>> When Christianity was strong and in control is what we call "The Dark 
> >>>> Ages". Now that it
> >>>> is no longer in control and the Western world relies on the technology 
> >>>> of science,
> >>>> Christian apologists are writing revisionist histories.
> >>> I agree, organized religion has been a catastrophe for the world, and
> >>> it still is, but that doesn't change the historical emergence of
> >>> science from spiritual contemplation.
> >> I would suggest you to consider Soviet Union under Stalin when military
> >> atheists took the power over. I guess that the absolute number of
> >> victims was even more.
> >> Just one examples. Nikolai Vavilov - a famous biologist working in
> >> genetics (compare his fate with that of Copernicus and Galileo)
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Vavilov
> >> Late 1930s - Lysenko, who has conceived a hatred for genetics is put in
> >> charge of all of Soviet agriculture
> >> 1940 - arrested for allegedly wrecking Soviet agriculture; delivered
> >> more than a hundred hours of lectures on science while in prison
> >> 1943 - died imprisoned and suffering from dystrophia (faulty nutrition
> >> of muscles, leading to paralysis), in the Saratov prison.
> > I don't think we can say that was caused by atheism though. Soviet
> > communism was still atheistic after Stalin, wasn't it? There are
> > secular authorities in power in other countries where there has not
> > been any genocidal consequences. It seems like there have been and
> > continue to be bloody crusades and inquisitions in the name of
> > religion specifically that we haven't really seen associated with
> > movements for the sake of atheism.
> > Craig
> Any world view that attracts 'true believers' and promises 'a better world' 
> can be
> co-opted for political power.  Humans are social animals and like to belong 
> to greater
> organizations.  This is useful, but like most useful things, also dangerous.  
> Science
> tends to avoid this because it institutionalizes skeptical testing.

Religion relies on true believers because it works like multi-level
marketing, riding on human enthusiasm to promote super-signifying
ideals. Science promises a better world and attracts true believers
also, but it's success doesn't rely on subjective enthusiasm directly,
but indirectly as commercial-cultural consequences of objective
products (technology). The danger of science isn't in the popularity
or zealotry of it, but in the short-sightedness of its products and
the promotion of instrumental reasoning that impacts society

Science incorporates many admirable checks and balances, but
ultimately all of those can be corrupted with enough money and
influence. It isn't really science that is the modern anti-theology,
it is law and finance which is the purest and most fanatical
expression of empirical worship. Science has become the servant of
that quantitative anti-theocracy, but it is a willing servant and not


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to