Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind

[tar]

dimreeper,

 

 

Neither is highly religious but one believes in God and the other not so much. Both are kind and generous and have been taught the Protestant work ethic (even though they went to Episcopal church and my mother took us to Presbyterian Sunday School and church.) The younger, the not so much one, just got her PhD in chemical research and the older one that believes in God more, works in the old age rehabilitation field.

 

And to the idea that even scientific millennials can hate I point to the vitriol the progressives in the U.S. have for Republicans. Especially for older white Anglo-saxon Protestant heterosexuals that live in the Suburbs.

 

I am thinking that it does not work to create a religion/morality out of whole cloth. You have to use the stuff that has worked for generations, and you have to still attempt to go by a morality that 90% of the people around you also subscribe to. There is no such thing as objective morality, it all has to accrue directly to human needs, wants, hopes, and dreams, and be structured to please others, as well as yourself, or it will not work. (at least will not work for long)

 

Regards, TAR

I am sort of contradicting myself by saying that morality consists mainly of talking to an unseen other that exists in the objectively true waking world at the same time I am saying there is no such thing as objective morality, but I mean that when you take humans as a whole, we can not all together come up with a morality that does not serve humans. Like we cannot come up with worm morality or rain drop morality or discern some morality that serves all neutrons equally.

Edited June 18, 2017 by tar

[Itoero]

Well, that's up to them but why is that automatically a bad thing?

I did not say it is...