On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Roger Clough <rclo...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Hi Stathis,
> You say :
> "My primary problem with religion is the poverty or non validity of
> argument, notably based on text or per authority, instead of personal
> inquiry."

I didn't say that, Bruno did, but I agree.

> You could say the same thing about Da Vinci's Mona Lisa.
> Or values in general. Science can only deal with fact.
> Values are nonphysical so can't be measured.
> Many facts are physical so can be measured.
> Let science be science and religion be religion.
> They belong to entirely different spheres of being.
> Non-overlapping circles in a Venn diagram.

But the problem is that religion makes *factual* claims. I repeat my other post:

Let me be specific about what I dispute. I dispute the factual claims
made by religions. For example:

- Athena sprang fully formed from the head of Zeus when Hephaestus
struck it with an ax to relieve a headache;
- Yahweh dictated the ten commandments to Moses;
- Ganesha is an elephant headed god who promotes good luck;
- You go to Heaven when you die if you accept that Jesus is God and
repent your sins.

If you remove the factual claims then you are left with statements
that may be inspiring, poetic, vacuous or nonsensical, but not true or
false. For example:

- Athena sprang from Zeus' head because in mythology she represents wisdom;
- The ten commandments are a good basis for morality;
- Worshiping Ganesha gives Hindus comfort and hope;
- Jesus taught the importance of forgiveness.

Stathis Papaioannou

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