Science and Religion. Pros and cons?

Pros of science; can be a springboard for new ideas,theoretically encourages free thought. Can be empirical.

Cons; organised science is an elite activity dictated by money and ideology. Many sciences are just speculative theories. Science in the main asserts its the only valid path to knowledge.

Pros of religion; can take account of personal experience,human desires,aesthetics and psychology.
A positive worldview. Deals in certainty.

Cons; Organised religion is about dogmatic control and money. Texts at variance with human experience and ambiguous. Asserts it has a monopoly on truth.

There's more. But just a taster!

Reply to Zenny
Religion can tell you what they feel is best for humanity.
Science can tell you what is factually best for humanity.
But Philosophy can tell you what is rationally best for humanity.

[i]We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology. Carl Sagan

Though all religions assert that they worship God and say that we must love one another, they instil fear through their doctrines of reward and punishment, and through their competitive dogmas they perpetuate suspicion and antagonism. J Krishnamurti[/i]

Pros of science: iPhone

Cons of science: A-bomb

Pros of religion: Grace

Cons of religion: Jihad

Reply to praxis

Ha. Every once in a while you right something worth reading. Succinct and amusing.

Reply to Zenny

Both can be and are movements of beliefs. Both can be a source of conflict between humans.

Quoting DingoJones

Ha. Every once in a while you [s]right[/s] write something worth reading. Succinct and amusing.

I’ll put you down as an honorary member of my personal fan club. Oh, and I righted your right. Free typo correct is just one of the many perks of being in the praxis fan club. :point:

@skyblack Yep. Both are beliefs. How would you ascertain which beliefs are correct in general?

@Benkei And how do you expect me to reply when streetlight closed the thread?
Listen,I don't expect any even handedness from you or the moderators. And because two people disagreed who are partisan that was evidence? When was truth decided by poll? Your refusal to answer pertinent questions was instructive. Many times things are obvious.
Many people see that this is a form of new Racism.
But anyway,things on the ground are great! So bleh to disguised intellectualised racism!

Quoting praxis

Pros of science: iPhone
Cons of science: A-bomb
Pros of religion: Grace
Cons of religion: Jihad

(y)

Science pro: all-but doing away with tuberculosis and related suffering
Science con: self-guided long-range mass-destruction missiles (with triggers in a human hand)
Religion pro: virtual leash on (would-be) crazies
Religion con: doubtful (and mutually incompatible) grandiose truth claims

Reply to Zenny

Quoting Zenny

Yep. Both are beliefs. How would you ascertain which beliefs are correct in general?

If something is seen as a belief is there any need for further ascertainment? And for what purpose? No ascertainment will make a belief a fact. BTW what happened to the OP and the other replies on this thread?

@skyblack OK. Your using belief in terms of not being factual. I don't think this is the best way. Some beliefs are true or facts. I believe in my ability to run. That's true and factual.
The other thread is still there. Closed by the thought police.

Quoting Zenny

I believe in my ability to run

I would say , " I know i can run". Knowing isn't a belief.

@skyblack So we just disagree on the word.
To me some beliefs are knowing. And some knowing is wrong.
I believe and know the sun will rise tommorow.
Some people say they know their race is superior. That's false.
See what I mean?

Quoting Zenny

So we just disagree on the word.

No we are disagreeing on the fact. The fact being, a belief isn't the same as knowing. A belief is having a faith on something in absence of facts.

@skyblack According to you.
I just gave you some examples.

Quoting Zenny

I just gave you some examples

And i clarified that the usage of the words is incorrect. They are conflating two different facts.

@Skyclark Incorrect according to you.

Quoting Zenny

Incorrect according to you.

The dictionary will also say the same thing. I think i am done here. Thank you.