Will Science Drive Religion Extinct?

[Torie]

The article is just silly, does not live up to the headline, and of course the real answer is an obvious "no," but what I found most arresting was the claim based on "data" that belief in science and technology was a surer road to being satisfied with life, than belief in religion. Did they correct for social economic class?

Anyway, now I know why I am happy. I'm Godless!

[RINO Tom]

I'm not godless and quite happy.

So, no correlation.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Is Torie literally making posts from the 19th century now?

[Torie]

Is Torie literally making posts from the 19th century now?

That was in my prime Al.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

Is Torie literally making posts from the 19th century now?

Nineteenth-century Whig (? or Whige) posts, no less.

[Mopsus]

It might be true that science will replace religion (a pretty scary thought, tbh) for those who think that their worldview is based in empirical facts, but it's definitely true that the religious experience offers something that no amount of scientific knowledge will ever be able to match.

[RI]

No, as only ignorant people or those with strong agendas believe science is a substitute for religion and vice versa.

[Antonio the Sixth]

lol

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Lol no.

[RFayette]

No, as only ignorant people or those with strong agendas believe science is a substitute for religion and vice versa.

This.  Also, keep in mind, as science drives further forward, many just won't accept the results.  I know plenty of young-Earth creationists, and I'm confident no new development in science or technology will change their mind, unless they really dive deep into the evidence, which I did.

Also, religion in general will is doing extraordinarily well in Africa and the Middle East and is largely staying strong in the United States (and even, to an extent, Europe) among its devoted core despite the decline in mainline Protestantism and to a lesser degree, Catholicism.  Besides, people are still rather spiritual even if there are fewer formally religious..  I'd imagine most people fall to their knees or pray in situations of duress, even if they are not normally religious.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Atheism leading to greater happiness appears at least in our current time to be sociologically unlikely. If it was possible to replace religion with some sort of civic ideology that contained certain non-rational elements, then potentially. In any case, such is unlikely, so hopefully not!

[RFayette]

Atheism leading to greater happiness appears at least in our current time to be sociologically unlikely. If it was possible to replace religion with some sort of civic ideology that contained certain non-rational elements, then potentially. In any case, such is unlikely, so hopefully not!

This is true.  Atheism tends to be more "reactive" against religion rather than espouse a positive ideology itself.  Granted, many show awe at the advancements of science and technology (which is indeed incredible), but the philosophy itself doesn't really grant greater happiness by itself - there's a reason that only relatively prosperous and secure societies have sizable atheist populations (communist nations excepted) - it's not exactly a comforting proposition, irrespective of whether or not it's true.

[afleitch]

Atheism is simply non belief in a god. It doesn't 'ask' for anything else. It's like calling someone a theist and expecting then to think, believe and act the same as every other theist.

Aa such they are philosophically diverse. There is just no recourse to a god in that thinking.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Nope. The overwhelming majority of american adults already have their minds made up on whether Science and Religion can co-exist or not, and they'll pass their respective beliefs on to the next generation. Science has done all the damage it's going to do.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Science has done all the damage it's going to do.

1. What the hell does that even mean?
2. Have you ever seen/read a SciFi movie/show/book?

[Why]

Absolutely not, one day everyone on earth will believe in God.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

No, India is a too stubborn nation to turn into Sweden.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

No.  They have survived and coexisted for thousands of years, so neither one will supplant the other now.

If anything, I suspect that most people will realize with time what I already believe--that science and religion complement, rather than conflict with, each other.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Atheism is simply non belief in a god. It doesn't 'ask' for anything else. It's like calling someone a theist and expecting then to think, believe and act the same as every other theist.

Aa such they are philosophically diverse. There is just no recourse to a god in that thinking.

It is the active belief that there is no God, based either on faith or on a lack of empirical evidence.  But whether God(s) exist(s) or not is currently unprovable... so you're participating in an active belief.

You can be agnostic and accept that you don't know either way and not be particularly concerned about it... or you can identify as an atheist and be "certain".

[afleitch]

It is the active belief that there is no God, based either on faith or on a lack of empirical evidence.  But whether God(s) exist(s) or not is currently unprovable... so you're participating in an active belief.

You can be agnostic and accept that you don't know either way and not be particularly concerned about it... or you can identify as an atheist and be "certain".

Why be 'agnostic' towards god, but not towards homeopathy, or the zodiac, or Xenu? Do you think agnosticism towards those things is more balanced. Is rejection of them, an active belief? Is atheism not a rejection of the forced ontology of 'god v no god'?

[Alcon]

It is the active belief that there is no God, based either on faith or on a lack of empirical evidence.

That's a very narrow definition of "atheism," that neither reflects the literal meaning of the word ("without atheism"), nor a common belief (few atheists actively believe there is certainly no God; agnostic atheism is much more common than "hard" atheism).

Most people would claim that there's not rational reason to believe in God, but that is not the same as "active belief that there is no God" -- we are, after all, talking about a metaphysical subject.

[RightBehind]

I think faith will never be extinct. Not in this country, anyway. I do think we'll continue to see rates of religious people decline and I think it'll be wielded differently as opposed to the past, but religion is an ideology. It's something abstract, and you can never completely eradicate something abstract.

Advances in human civilization has not neutralized racism, misogyny or misandry. They're all abstract things. They might decline. Things might improve in those areas, but like religion, they'll never cease.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Atheism is simply non belief in a god. It doesn't 'ask' for anything else. It's like calling someone a theist and expecting then to think, believe and act the same as every other theist.

Aa such they are philosophically diverse. There is just no recourse to a god in that thinking.

     There are people who have been trying to impute positive ideology to atheism, such as PZ Myers. Such attempts have been, at best, deeply controversial among atheists. Atheists are indeed philosophically diverse, and no less so than the theists are. It is not feasible to speak broadly of what we believe.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

It is the active belief that there is no God, based either on faith or on a lack of empirical evidence.  But whether God(s) exist(s) or not is currently unprovable... so you're participating in an active belief.

You can be agnostic and accept that you don't know either way and not be particularly concerned about it... or you can identify as an atheist and be "certain".

Why be 'agnostic' towards god, but not towards homeopathy, or the zodiac, or Xenu? Do you think agnosticism towards those things is more balanced. Is rejection of them, an active belief? Is atheism not a rejection of the forced ontology of 'god v no god'?

I'm agnostic towards ghosts.

[Mauldania]

I feel like religion will always be around. I hope that science can push it back a little.