So religion doesn't attempt to describe the world, measure phenomena and come up with better ways for mankind to live?
If you don't understand that's what it comes from then there is no point continuing this discussion.
You see that RC church thing? You've heard of Protestants? The Reformation? The various councils? The invent of Islam? These are all "more useful" in the eyes of their believers, thus splinter groups pick up and run with them. And occasionally they will change their own position, for example whether or not to burn heretics at the stake, or to accept a limited about of "scientific" exploration. There is little difference in the belief system that takes "Jesus Christ, Man or God?" and "Atomic Nuclei, Pudding or Orbitals?". In both cases it is tested by the same types of minds using the tools their experts think is relevant, and the models updated appropriately.
Their is little difference between dogma and currently accepted methodology. Re-labelling it doesn't make it into something different.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-06 06:02 pm (UTC)If you don't understand that's what it comes from then there is no point continuing this discussion.
You see that RC church thing? You've heard of Protestants? The Reformation? The various councils? The invent of Islam?
These are all "more useful" in the eyes of their believers, thus splinter groups pick up and run with them. And occasionally they will change their own position, for example whether or not to burn heretics at the stake, or to accept a limited about of "scientific" exploration. There is little difference in the belief system that takes "Jesus Christ, Man or God?" and "Atomic Nuclei, Pudding or Orbitals?". In both cases it is tested by the same types of minds using the tools their experts think is relevant, and the models updated appropriately.
Their is little difference between dogma and currently accepted methodology. Re-labelling it doesn't make it into something different.