Is religion slowing down progress?

[MaximMK]

I don't believe in god(s) or superior, supernatural beings. Thou science can't explain fully how the big bang occurred or where does our soul (consciousness) goes after death or it just disappears like before we were born it doesn't mean there has to be a creator behind everything. I find religion as a primitive tool to bring peace to the world and unite people. Religion teaches peace and good values but also uses gods and punishments to make people behave good and follow the rules like the 10 commandments. People don't need religion to have moral values and it should be left to the past. Religion just slows down progress and divides the people more because there is more than one. Also lots of cash are wasted on thousands of churches.

An example: In my country there were plans for building an astronomical observatory on the mountain near the capital city but the right wing government decided that building a millennial cross in the year 2000 is more important and the plans failed. Now 11 years later we have a giant cross but no observatory anywhere. The people's education here about astronomy is very small and they believe in many lies like the world will end in 2012 because they don't know anything about our place in the universe the only thing we have is one planetarium made during the socialism.

Do you think religion slows down progress of humanity in other ways too?

:star2: :hammersickle: :star2:

[Johnny Kerosene]

Stem cell research in the US is hindered by pro-life people, most of whom, are religious fundies.

[Tablo]

I would agree religion is slowing down scientific progress. I'm sorry to hear they built a giant cross rather than something useful in your country. I'm in the southern US and we have lots of giant crosses and useless shit. We also have, in the past, dealt with religious groups like the KKK and the Army of God. Army of God have done stuff like blow up abortion clinics. I do not wish to express any ill will towards sane religious people who care about progress and keep their beliefs to themselves, but religion in general is a detriment on that progress of humanity.

[MaximMK]

Stem cell research in the US is hindered by pro-life people, most of whom, are religious fundies.

Yes I'm not saying all of the religious people are evil or something religion itself teaches of unity and peace but it is not necessary anymore. There may be some religious people that give money to help science but they do damage to society more than they help like in my example and by "poisoning" people with their unsupported belief. Throughout history religion never did its role to bring peace. It was always used in political causes and always inspired war like the crusades and even the 9/11 attacks lets say. It would be better if believers followed the rules of religion. Example: KKK and the army of god killed people and killing other people is something religion is AGAINST. Christianity in this case teaches of forgiveness and peace but these "Christians" dont follow their own god's rules and teachings by doing the opposite. I just want to say religion is not a good method of uniting people we don't need it.


:star2: :hammersickle: :star2:

[Heathen Communist]

I must, as a religious person myself, disagree with you.
People do tend to take religion too far, or to corrput it into something that promotes viuolence, etc., but we should not make the mistake of thinking it is religion itself that does that.
My religion does not teach unity; I really don't understand what you mean by that.
I do not believe religion takes the place of science, nor that it can fully explain that which science attempts to.
Religion should be personal. It should be a way for people to connect with the world we live in in an emotional and spiritual way. That's what it's for. Unfortunately, many people have come to use religion as a means of control, spreading fear and suppressing free thought. I in no way support them or their corruptions of religion.

Also, one should not make the mistake of thinking "Christianity" and "religion" are synonymous. Christianity is but one religion, and probably one that could find its place, albeit in a different form, alongside Socialism. It has problems that must be remedied before this can happen, but if Christians adopt the teachings of Jesus, they will inevitably become Socialists themselves.

[CommieTroll]

Like Capitalism, Religion is a disease that must be wiped out, its an irrational tool used to control the minds of the western sheep and make money

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

'Do you think religion slows down progress of humanity in other ways too?'
Religion is used as a cultural and scientific tool and when it is used in a certain way it can indeed slow down the development of humanity, as has been shown in various cases. However, Religion itself has been apart of human society for thousands of years and can't simply be erased from society, as much as it slows down human society, the correct answer to this is to use it as a tool in which society can be allowed to progress. Such as-- Given that God isn't a factual being, the Church is an essentially useless structure and can be used in the manner that it can be turned towards secularity, Positive-Atheism and Pro-Scientific thinking. The correct manner to do this is by creating an alternative to Abrahamic Religious tools that shall be superior in nature when compared to Abrahamic religions.

[Johnny Kerosene]

Like Capitalism, Religion is a disease that must be wiped out, its an irrational tool used to control the minds of the western sheep and make money

Western Sheep? There are religions all over the world. And most of the more influential ones in the West started closer to the Middle East.

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

Western Sheep? There are religions all over the world. And most of the more influential ones in the West started closer to the Middle East.
He seems to be referring to the modern form of Abrahamic religions and the social backwardness and exploitation that continually goes hand and hand with them which is what he is referring to with 'Western sheep'.

[MaximMK]

Today there are people that become atheists even in religious families. And it can be erased since we are all born atheist. It will be remembered in history but forgotten in time. I'm just saying its not necessary anymore. The world can even be better without it.

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

Today there are people that become atheists even in religious families. And it can be erased since we are all born atheist. It will be remembered in history but forgotten in time. I'm just saying its not necessary anymore. The world can even be better without it.
1.) 'Today there are people that become atheists even in religious families.'
Indeed there are, as this is a progression of personal religious beliefs into a lack thereof religious beliefs.
2.) 'And it can be erased since we are all born atheist'
This however is untrue as the religious history still remains and is a factor on society even though-- Defacto de-Christianization has occured and there are no longer official institutions for Christianity. As previously stated, attempting to force upon years of religious change in the period of a small time is-- Futile. The Cult of Reason had attempted to do so and the futility was eventually realized when there was a lack of success in the matter.
3.) 'It will be remembered in history but forgotten in time'
History stays for the existence of humanity and due to this it will be remembered.
4.) 'I'm just saying its not necessary anymore. The world can even be better without it.'
It is necessary in certain effects, such as culture matters. Which is the reason to go along with a Pro-Positive Atheistic leaning an alternative system with its own cultural revolutionary identity must be formed in order to replace the previous revolutionary order. This de-facto replaces Christianity for a State-Sponsored Secular, Humanistic, Pro-Scientific and rational thinking movement that represents viewing religious historical figures of all kinds as positive, pushing forward science and promoting cultural activities as a state replacement of religious activities. Yet-- It still allows for religious activities to take place on their own basis. Of course though, it would strike against exploitative religious practices and social backwardness.

[MaximMK]

Yes it is important for culture and churches can be turned in museums for a part of human development when it needed religion to have moral values. When all people learn that its not OK to kill a man because he is equal and same like you instead of because god will punish you we won't need it anymore. I believe people don't need religion to be moral or self-confident. Maybe in some more developed countries religious people do help the progress of science but only there. In the other world its different story they want to build a church on every corner in my country and they are doing it and it pisses me off. Even when i do prove god is not real to someone he says: Even tho you are right i can't give up on religion since i was taught that since a child. People need to stop poisoning their children and let them decide for themselves and than religion can and will be forgotten in time. Religion itself its a good thing and has a noble purpose but few are the people that truly follow it and for me its just a unnecessary belief in this modern world that needs to be left in the past and be replaced with common sense.

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

Yes it is important for culture and churches can be turned in museums for a part of human development when it needed religion to have moral values. When all people learn that its not OK to kill a man because he is equal and same like you instead of because god will punish you we won't need it anymore. I believe people don't need religion to be moral or self-confident. Maybe in some more developed countries religious people do help the progress of science but only there. In the other world its different story they want to build a church on every corner in my country and they are doing it and it pisses me off. Even when i do prove god is not real to someone he says: Even tho you are right i can't give up on religion since i was taught that since a child. People need to stop poisoning their children and let them decide for themselves and than religion can and will be forgotten in time. Religion itself its a good thing and has a noble purpose but few are the people that truly follow it and for me its just a unnecessary belief in this modern world that needs to be left in the past and be replaced with common sense.

1.) 'Yes it is important for culture and churches can be turned in museums for a part of human development when it needed religion to have moral values.'
I'm unsure what you're attempting to go at here. This sort of De-Christianization doesn't offer an alternative and simply attempts to push forward this idea of progress over night and as previously said is futile, as it attempts to force itself upon others as opposed to offering it as a liberating alternative. You can't simply replace all churches with Museums and so on, as it doesn't offer any potential cultural solutions for the loss of these items. Example: Christianity is now gone, as are all Abrahamic Religions, no longer are there religious ceremonies for Marriage. Which is one on the key issues, they're now lacking what was a beautiful seeming ceremony and there is nothing to replace it with.

Religion itself is not the problem, the problem however is organized exploitative religion which is what you're referring to. Again, as a solution what I had previously said replaces religious attitudes at a state level completely and offers the people an alternative however, isn't simply secularism as it has its own culture built into it and is truly is own replacement to the currently existing religious system.
2.) 'When all people learn that its not OK to kill a man because he is equal and same like you instead of because god will punish you we won't need it anymore. I believe people don't need religion to be moral or self-confident.'
I agree with this, yet this can't be forced upon in a small period of time. Which is the reason that an alternative system is proposed and non-exploitative religion is still allowed to be followed and believed in.
3.) 'Maybe in some more developed countries religious people do help the progress of science but only there. In the other world its different story they want to build a church on every corner in my country and they are doing it and it pisses me off.'
As I said, exploitative religion is to be combated at all costs and the alternative system offers cultural solutions and promotes religious figures as humanistic figures to say the least.
4.) 'Even when i do prove god is not real to someone he says: Even tho you are right i can't give up on religion since i was taught that since a child. People need to stop poisoning their children and let them decide for themselves and than religion can and will be forgotten in time'
As I said it has become embedded as a cultural situation which is the reason an alternative system that is superior to a religious system needs to be championed and promoted, yet it has to allow for personal religious belief to still occur.
5.) 'Religion itself its a good thing and has a noble purpose but few are the people that truly follow it and for me its just a unnecessary belief in this modern world that needs to be left in the past and be replaced with common sense.'
Then you agree that the current religious systems need to be replaced with a state-based humanistic religion that embodies the aspirations of the collective force of humanity and pushed forward as an alternative system to organized religion. As previously said-- Its futile to just attempt to wipe out a belief.

Semi-Related: If you're interested I have some images in my Album related to the God Building Movement in my Album.

[MaximMK]

I don't plan to wipe it out by force i think it will come by itself in time. And when nobody believes in religion we wouldn't need atheism any-longer just as we don't have adragonism since nobody believes in dragons. Atheism doesn't want domination it will cease to exist with religion too. And than we won't talk on that topic anymore and continue without it.

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

I don't plan to wipe it out by force i think it will come by itself in time. And when nobody believes in religion we wouldn't need atheism any-longer just as we don't have adragonism since nobody believes in dragons. Atheism doesn't want domination it will cease to exist with religion too. And than we won't talk on that topic anymore and continue without it.
1.) 'I don't plan to wipe it out by force i think it will come by itself in time.'
Which is the reason that an alternative system is to be built to replace the previously existing religious system that has its interests in materialism, humanism, scientific thought and represents the collective force of humanity together as one.
2.) ' And when nobody believes in religion we wouldn't need atheism any-longer just as we don't have adragonism since nobody believes in dragons.'
And during the meantime however and afterward there will need to exist a system to replace needed parts of the previously existing religious system, simply judging by human history of course.
3. 'And than we won't talk on that topic anymore and continue without it.'
See the previous.

[IndependentCitizen]

No, science is always progressing. Religion hasn't progressed since the day their holy books were written. Eventually science will just take over.

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

No, science is always progressing. Religion hasn't progressed since the day their holy books were written. Eventually science will just take over.
Science however is unable to replace the cultural aspects that Religion has created and even though science is showing the way forward, Religion will still continue to remain, which is the reason that an Alternative System must be pushed forward that is built out of the collective interest of humanity and leans towards humanism, Pro-Scientific thought, materialism and rational thinking, and at the same time expresses solidarity for the collective masses of humanity.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Organized religion by itself is neither automatically and agent of progress or a fetter on progress. Historically it has played both roles. Protestant ideology was historically progressive compared to the feudal Catholic church because it was part of the process in which the middle class (the emerging bourgeois) replaced feudal hegemony (ideas used to bolster the feudal caste system). The feudal Christianity had become a fetter for social progress, money-changing was prohibited to christians (i.e. the basis of capitalism - investing money to make profits) and no matter how wealthy a merchant became they were subject to the rule of aristocrats who did not want to see a more fluid profit-based economic system, they wanted to keep the order that allowed them to be on top from birth. Similarly, Buddhism challenged the caste-system of Hinduism and Shia Islam also ushered in a progressive political change originally.

But, of course, these same "progressive" religious movements later came to also be fetters on development later. Protestantism was against people being placed into a caste from birth, but then also excused slavery in the US or now promotes anti-scientific views or sexist and homophobic views. Buddhism also became more conservative and reintroduced caste systems.

So why does this happen? Because religion does not exist outside or above class society, it is a product and a reflection of it. Religion has anti-progressive views when the ruling class of a society has anti-progressive views and uses organized religion to promote these views. When the merchants needed science and needed a new view of the world that allowed for people to become rich and an economy run by laws designed to promote profit-making... they had religious movements that gave them the new worldview to justify this. But now that the capitalists are well-established, they don't want to upset the new status-quo that serves them, so religion promotes ideas that are a fetter to increased democracy or scientific knowledge that may contradict ideas promoted by the ruling class.

Religion in the abstract does not slow down progress, it is one tool of many used by ruling classes to promote their ideology. You might as well argue (and many leftists do) that Hollywood or Newspapers or Public Education slow down progress because they are at least as responsible for spreading false information that helps reinforce the ruling status quo.

I think it's the wrong way to go for radicals to focus on religion - it's one tool or one reflection of the class that dominates society. Trying to fight religion is like trying to beat someone up by attacking their shadow.

[MaximMK]

Indeed but i still hate people for believing in something so obviously imaginary.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Stem cell research in the US is hindered by pro-life people, most of whom, are religious fundies.

cus capitalist technological innovation = PROGRESS

[Franz Fanonipants]

Indeed but i still hate people for believing in something so obviously imaginary.

I'm sure that's a good use of your time.

Anyways, no, ideas can't "slow down progress." That's fundamentally a liberal bourgeoisie conceit.

[MaximMK]

Any technological innovation is progress not just capitalists. The fact that religious people support it doesn't mean that religion made him do it. He was motivated by his own common sense that steam cell research will help humanity. We don't need kids stories to give us good values and moral we are not children that need stories with a message in the end to act good so we do it. We can decide ourselves what is good and what is bad.

[MaximMK]

I'm sure that's a good use of your time.

Anyways, no, ideas can't "slow down progress." That's fundamentally a liberal bourgeoisie conceit.


Yes they can anything we do is based on ideas even Nazism is an idea.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Yes they can anything we do is based on ideas even Nazism is an idea.

Congratulations, bro, you're not a Marxist.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Any technological innovation is progress not just capitalists.

In capitalism, it kind of is sorry to break it to you.

E: that is to say, unless the workers control the means to replicate technological innovations, technological innovation is basically the province of capital.

[MaximMK]

Congratulations, bro, you're not a Marxist.


You said ideas can't do damage i said they can since they later turn into actions like nationalism turned into genocide.

[Triple A]

I'm sure that's a good use of your time.

Anyways, no, ideas can't "slow down progress." That's fundamentally a liberal bourgeoisie conceit.

People dont know [] (fill [] with anything science cant explain, yet)

Scienstis: Lets find out how it began /is cured/existes.
Religions: God did it/ to cure lets pray.


So yes ideas can slow progress

[hatzel]

You said ideas can't do damage i said they can since they later turn into actions like nationalism turned into genocide.

I vaguely remember reading something like that in the Talmud :tt2:

(That's my way of saying that this thread has gone a bit silly...)

[Franz Fanonipants]

You said ideas can't do damage i said they can since they later turn into actions like nationalism turned into genocide.

hahaha

that's cute.

[MaximMK]

It is true since all we do is based on ideas.

[Tjis]

It is true since all we do is based on ideas.

That is just half of the picture. Ideas don't originate out of nothing, but are a reflection of the society we live in. For example Christianity didn't get big because nobody knew any better and just latched onto the first story they heard that explained the world, it got big because it had the support of powerful people (roman emperors and medieval kings) who spread it through their domains, often enforcing it with violence. It had this support because Christianity justifies their powerful position as being the will of God. In turn, Christian practice and institutions shaped over time to support these power structures that in turn supported them.

In many places in the world, the church is still the center of people's social life. Becoming an atheist (or converting to any other religion) would essentially mean cutting oneself off from the only support network these people have, and therefore they are not very likely to do so. Christianity is not maintained by ignorance but by very real material conditions.

[MaximMK]

In many places in the world, the church is still the center of people's social life. Becoming an atheist (or converting to any other religion) would essentially mean cutting oneself off from the only support network these people have, and therefore they are not very likely to do so. Christianity is not maintained by ignorance but by very real material conditions.

I'm an atheist and i have no problems it is a matter of personal belief and if all become atheist the support network wouldn't have to be connected to religion. Overall I'm just trying to say in this thread that we can put an end to illogical belief and the world or any human wouldn't be dependent on religion like this network you talk about makes him be. Common sense can guide us instead of stories.

[hatzel]

Overall I'm just trying to say in this thread that we can put an end to illogical belief and the world or any human wouldn't be dependent on religion like this network you talk about makes him be.

Then why is the thread title something clearly different? What's the point of having different threads with their own titles and OPs in this section when about three-quarters are effectively just people doing exactly that? Can't you just start a thread dedicated to that discussion, whilst the rest of us discuss specific topics?

[Tjis]

I'm an atheist and i have no problems it is a matter of personal belief and if all become atheist the support network wouldn't have to be connected to religion. Overall I'm just trying to say in this thread that we can put an end to illogical belief and the world or any human wouldn't be dependent on religion like this network you talk about makes him be. Common sense can guide us instead of stories.
And how do you propose we put an end to illogical belief?

[MaximMK]

By educating and proving Christians that god cant be real using logic and science.

[Franz Fanonipants]

By educating and proving Christians that god cant be real using logic and science.

I think you'd have to have some concept of Base-Superstructure interactions to do that, so you've basically failed at the groundwork there bro.

[Franz Fanonipants]

People dont know [] (fill [] with anything science cant explain, yet)

Scienstis: Lets find out how it began /is cured/existes.
Religions: God did it/ to cure lets pray.


So yes ideas can slow progress

This is stupid, and basically shows that your level of analysis is stuck somewhere around Edward Gibbon's "The Roman Empire Fell 'cus Christians CARE NOT OF THIS WORLD" analysis of historical phenomena.

Neither of you are effective leftist thinkers if you're stuck at about that level. In fact, I'd argue it's pretty reactionary.

[MaximMK]

Well majority of the Christians do that. Remember: Pray for japan! hell no do something real instead of praying!!!!

And wery few are the people that truly see the concept of religion and follow it in my country i can talk with experience religion DIVIDES people. Few months ago Muslim people tried to demolish a church built where they live as a provocation to them and than brave religious guys came to "defend" the faith. And a MASSIVE fight occurred. Oh but they never knew that Jesus was against fighting no no no their parents don't teach them that they instead teach that they are the true-believers and the others are just scum. Well my friend majority are like this and generally even if its good religion does divide people and stops progress not just in science but in uniting the people in one race too. Nobody hates another nation or race cause its different. Most of the discrimination cases are on religion. You can all say that some religious guy invests in steam cell research... so what when it also does all this + we are not sure if religion motivated this guy to do it.

[☭The Revolution☭]

The fact of religion hindering progress has been established for over a century.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

Anyways, no, ideas can't "slow down progress."

Three words Mr. Fancypants: The Dark Ages.

The religious powers held mankind and science back for a MILLENNIUM. Imagine where we'd be today if the Dark Ages hadn't happened.

[Tjis]

Three words Mr. Fancypants: The Dark Ages.

The religious powers held mankind and science back for a MILLENNIUM. Imagine where we'd be today if the Dark Ages hadn't happened.

The dark ages were not caused by religion at all. They were caused by the collapse of the roman empire and the struggle for power that followed. The Catholic church was a powerful player but not by virtue of being religious, but because they were the only powerful institution that remained from the time of the roman empire. Right from the start they owned a lot of land, resources and commanded an army. And they used that power to adapt to the new circumstances, eventually becoming the most powerful player in Europe. Sure, the doctrine they spread was supportive of this, but then again what ruling class does not spread a doctrine that makes their power legitimate?

Also, while the Catholic world was in disarray the Islamic world flourished scientifically, making such great discoveries as the workings of the human circulatory system. Why was religion not holding them back?

[manic expression]

Three words Mr. Fancypants: The Dark Ages.

The religious powers held mankind and science back for a MILLENNIUM. Imagine where we'd be today if the Dark Ages hadn't happened.
:lol: That's hilarious. You really, really need to read a history book sometime.

Very well said, Tjis...let me add a few things just for effect: The so-called "Dark Ages" (which were only really "dark" for Western Europe) happened primarily because W. Europe had been economically and culturally cut-off from the rest of the world, and because of the effects of various invasions (Saracen raids in the south, Viking raids almost everywhere and the Magyar invasion from the east). It didn't happen because of religion, and furthermore when Western Europe came out of that period at around 1000, it was partially due to the increase of learning within the church (we can point to the "Peace and Truce of God" movements in Europe as a positive example of the church's influence). However, the reintroduction of commerce to Western Europe, increasing security, heightened economic production coupled with improved farming conditions (look up "Medieval Climate Optimum") and other factors ended the so-called "Dark Ages".

[MaximMK]

What about massive killings of women with red hair cause they are withces they killed so many people by drowning them. Mothers, sisters... because of their stupid believes. I say no to religion and its foney-baloney stories that are obviously no different from kids stories about magic and supernatural creatures but good always wins. It is so primitive and idiotic without common sense!

[Inquisitive Lurker]

The European Dark Ages lasted from the 5th to the 15th century. During this time, the control of knowledge resided in the hands of the Church. Scientists were suppressed if any of their discoveries contradicted the established teachings. The Church held a monopoly on all knowledge.

Consider the inquisitions (13th - 16th centuries, 15th - 19th centuries)

Consider the case of Galileo Galilei.

We really didn't get things going until the Renaissance (14th - 17th century) and the Age of Enlightenment (18th century). Both of these coincided with the reduction in influence of religion.

[MaximMK]

Agreed even they tried to silence the guy that translated the Rosetta stone because it proved egyptian civilization existed 5000 years B.C. which destroys their theory about the great flood in which all life is destroyed. Well Egyptians still existed before and after the flood. Did god forget them ;)

[manic expression]

The European Dark Ages lasted from the 5th to the 15th century. During this time, the control of knowledge resided in the hands of the Church. Scientists were suppressed if any of their discoveries contradicted the established teachings. The Church held a monopoly on all knowledge.

Consider the inquisitions (13th - 16th centuries, 15th - 19th centuries)

Consider the case of Galileo Galilei.

We really didn't get things going until the Renaissance (14th - 17th century) and the Age of Enlightenment (18th century). Both of these coincided with the reduction in influence of religion.
The "Dark Ages" ended at around 1000. The church by 1500 had changed incredibly due to all sorts of pressures, including the dying off of most populist-minded churchmen in the plagues. Further, it's funny that you're still blind to the fact that the Islamic world was the center of learning and knowledge during this time (along with others)...and yet you're idea is that all religion is the same. Any plans to read that first history book you so terribly need?

[Inquisitive Lurker]

The "Dark Ages" ended at around 1000.



"Dark Ages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29)" is a historical periodization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periodization) emphasizing the cultural and economic deterioration that supposedly occurred in Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe) following the decline of the Roman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_the_Roman_Empire).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-OED-0)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-Merriam-Webster-1) The label employs traditional light-versus-darkness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_versus_darkness) imagery to contrast the "darkness" of the period with earlier and later periods of "light". Originally, the term characterized the bulk of the Middle Ages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Ages) (c. 5th - 15th century) as a period of intellectual darkness between the extinguishing of the light of Rome and the Renaissance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance) or rebirth from the 14th century onwards.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-mommsen-2) This definition is still found in popular usage,[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-OED-0)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-Merriam-Webster-1)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-Franklin-3) but increased recognition of the accomplishments of the Middle Ages since the 19th century has led to the label being restricted in application. Since the 20th century, it is frequently applied only to the earlier part of the era, the Early Middle Ages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Middle_Ages) (c. 5th - 10th century).[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-4)[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-5) However, many modern scholars who study the era tend to avoid the term altogether for its negative connotations, finding it misleading and inaccurate for any part of the Middle Ages.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-6)[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_%28historiography%29#cite_note-dmas-7)
From the fall of Rome to the Renaissance was the Dark Ages.

The inquisitions continued much longer, and targeted scientists as heretics.

The learning and advancement in the Islamic Empire was centered in Baghdad, and when the Empire collapsed, most of the progress was lost. Only a few writings remains.

Fast forward to modern Islam, which does not promote higher education (the way modern Judaism still does), thinks that learning the Quran is all you need, and actually has sects that prohibit ALL education.

[MaximMK]

Agreed even they tried to silence the guy that translated the Rosetta stone because it proved egyptian civilization existed 5000 years B.C. which destroys their theory about the great flood in which all life is destroyed. Well Egyptians still existed before and after the flood. Did god forget them ;)

I am repeating my argument since you didn't answer it and I use it as proof of one of the many cases where religion tries to stop the science in its discoveries because they will prove that their imaginary pathetic stories are not real. Religion trying to protect itself does stop progress.

[manic expression]

From the fall of Rome to the Renaissance was the Dark Ages.

The inquisitions continued much longer, and targeted scientists as heretics.
:laugh: So I take it you glossed wikipedia in order to find something that supported your historically-crosseyed argument? Or perhaps you're taking Petrarch's side, in which case your argument is not historical so much as it is a moral and cultural one.

But since you think the Roman Empire was all milk and honey, perhaps you'd be so kind as to be consistent and express your support for Greco-Roman paganism.

At any rate, historians generally hold that the "Dark Ages" ended at around 1000. In fact, it's the only sensible way to look at it. West Europe advanced greatly at that point culturally, economically, politically and otherwise. Your view of the "Dark Ages" is frankly un-historical. Your new date (the 14th Century, a century earlier than your previous fallacious argument) won't do because of the objective decline in both living standards and enlightened outlook that came about due to the black death. As I said earlier, that's really when the church became unbearably elitist.

Once again, your endless ignorance of history exposes your argument as fraudulent. But since you think the Roman Empire was all milk and honey, perhaps you'd be so kind as to be consistent and express your support for Greco-Roman paganism.


The learning and advancement in the Islamic Empire was centered in Baghdad, and when the Empire collapsed, most of the progress was lost. Only a few writings remains.
:laugh: Yeah, I guess Cordoba, Cairo and Toledo, all centers of learning, never really existed. Nope...just figments of our imagination.

By the way, by the 900's at least there was no "Islamic Empire". And just because Baghdad was destroyed by the Mongols doesn't mean Islam wasn't a center of learning and advancement. So try again, tell me how all religion is the same when Islam was acting as a lighthouse of science and philosophy. Have fun.


Fast forward to modern Islam, which does not promote higher education (the way modern Judaism still does), thinks that learning the Quran is all you need, and actually has sects that prohibit ALL education.
Yeah, you just made that up. There are plenty of Muslims in institutions of higher education. You, the anti-progressive hack that you are, take the worst examples of Islam and blow them up to represent the entirety of the religion.

Again, your grasp of religion is almost as bad as your obliviousness of history. So again, you should turn off the computer, go to your local library, and take out a few books on both subjects. That way, you won't sound like such a blundering idiot the next time you post.

[MaximMK]

Agreed even they tried to silence the guy that translated the Rosetta stone because it proved egyptian civilization existed 5000 years B.C. which destroys their theory about the great flood in which all life is destroyed. Well Egyptians still existed before and after the flood. Did god forget them ;)

yet again...


Id like to add a recent event of that nut-jobburning the Koran and that Arab guy burning the bible. Religion will never help in getting people together no matter what.

[manic expression]

yet again...


Id like to add a recent event of that nut-jobburning the Koran and that Arab guy burning the bible. Religion will never help in getting people together no matter what.
So you have three examples of religious people and/or institutions being reactionary. And? I can find far more examples of political movements being reactionary...so leftists should probably avoid those, too, huh? Protests, public speaking, newspapers, books...all things that have been used in very reactionary ways, but no one would seriously assert that they themselves are responsible for obstacles to progress.

Why, then, do you apply such an argument to religion?

[Astarte]

Not sure if anyone has brought this point up ... but take Ancient Egypt for a good example of religion propelling progress. The ascendancy of the Pharaoh was the driving ideology behind the construction of a civilization and culture that lasted for 4,000 years and mastered the arts, writing and architecture to name a few things; aspects of ancient Egypt still perpetuate themselves today. Mathematics were driven in Assyria, Babylon and in Greece by the likes of Ptolemy on the basis of the desire of the ruling elite for astrological divination - hence spirituality providing another channel inadvertently for the waters of progress to flow. Who can know what the future may hold?

[Franz Fanonipants]

Three words Mr. Fancypants: The Dark Ages.

The religious powers held mankind and science back for a MILLENNIUM. Imagine where we'd be today if the Dark Ages hadn't happened.


lol #historyfail

basically guys, referring to a European Dark Ages is about as reactionary as buying the idea that black people are inferior because of their skull sizes. you're swallowing reactionary bourgeoise ideological positions on history.

do yourselves a favor and stop posting until you're not "college recruiters"

[Property Is Robbery]

Holy shit
http://www.armyofgod.com/

[Jimmie Higgins]

Indeed but i still hate people for believing in something so obviously imaginary.Sure it can be frustrating, but many people also believe that trickle-down works or that their poor-asses will be millionaires someday or that the US military can be a force for good.

There's not material evidence to back all these ideas up, but they are commonplace and a way that the ruling class enforces its ideas onto people, so organized religion used in this way is just one piece in the toolbox IMO.


By educating and proving Christians that god cant be real using logic and science.

I think this ignores the flip-side of organized religion: it does people good. People aren't simply sheep and no matter how much some ideas are shoved at us from our rulers, they won't stick unless they do serve some kind of real function or explain something. On one level, religion provides people answers for the unknowable, like what happens after you die... IMO not a very convincing explanation, but they usually got one. Religion also provides people with a social explaination for why there is suffering in their lives, why there is misery in the world etc. Again, I don't agree with their explainations or think they hold up to much scrutiny, but it is important and one of the ways that right-wing religion in the US was able to win ground and push aside some of the more traditional religious views in favor of ultra-conservative ideas.

More than that I think religion provided people with a community. In the US where community has been privatized and sold off, churches provide people with "like-minded" associates, a place to go to talk over your problems (when therapy is out of reach for many working class people). People who can't afford healthcare or get their home foreclosed can count on churches and the church community to pass a hat in a country that is cutting welfare and health insurance in unaffordable and infective.

This social-side of religion is one way that I think the left can directly pose an alternative. Church social programs are just charity and in the past, radical groups like the large Socialist Parties before WWI, the CPs in the mid-20th century and groups like the Black Panthers and Maoist groups provided social programs and schools and so on for people - a long with a much more realistic and empowering message. By building the left and especially radical left politics, we can begin to show people how they can teach themselves to fish rather that get the shallow charity of churches ;)

When people see that society may be against them, but is not unknowable and a mystery only God can answer. When people can begin to shape society for themselves and in their own interest, then they will not need mystical reasons for why people starve - they will be able to see why this happens in our system and, more importantly, will begin to fight to change it.

[hatzel]

Oh, Jimmie, with your atheism 3.0 :)

I'm gonna go all flip-reverse here and be controversial: saw in the paper the other day that they've sent something up to ISS, some big box thing to measure something. Antimatter, I think, the prevalence of antimatter. Whatever it is, the paper said it cost £1,25 billion to build. What the hey?! We've got people down here on planet Earth starving, living on the streets, and they're spending a billion odd quid to find out how much antimatter's floating around in space? Who the fuck is that going to help? Wasting money on extravagant shit, if you ask me...

:)

[MaximMK]

Army of god - another example in the sea of million others proving religion does have a negative effect on people even tho it is not its purpose. As not effective in completing its goal to unite the people religion is to be removed.

About that ancient Egypt post where the pharaoh is described as a great divine guy developing art and stuff lets not forget he enslaved people like most of the other rulers of that time and religion doesn't have anything against it. In-fact religion ( Christianity at-least ) doesn't ban enslaving people and has very discriminatory theories about women like they are the tool of men and should always listen to them. Another fact proving religion is too old fashioned and we don't need it anymore in this modern world where we have better methods to unite all people ( communism ) than by scaring them with some fake gods.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Army of god - another example in the sea of million others proving religion does have a negative effect on people even tho it is not its purpose. As not effective in completing its goal to unite the people religion is to be removed.

About that ancient Egypt post where the pharaoh is described as a great divine guy developing art and stuff lets not forget he enslaved people like most of the other rulers of that time and religion doesn't have anything against it. In-fact religion ( Christianity at-least ) doesn't ban enslaving people and has very discriminatory theories about women like they are the tool of men and should always listen to them. Another fact proving religion is too old fashioned and we don't need it anymore in this modern world where we have better methods to unite all people ( communism ) than by scaring them with some fake gods.

You're still doing it wrong. All of this hateful energy you're aiming towards "false gods" and hating the working class for being religious is wasted because you're not looking at the central mechanism of oppression in our world.

Unless you are constantly talking about the material, economic conditions of that oppression (which religion can certainly be held partly accountable for) you're basically going to fail. This is why almost everyone here has been hostile and negative to your constant yammering about "illogic" and whatever other bullshit you're going on and on about.

[danyboy27]

Religion is bad for progress when it get involved in politics and guide the decisions of what is allowed and what is not in society in general.

With a clear separation between politics and religion this risk is nearly nonexistent.

A secular society is a win win for both side; it protect citizen choice of expressing and choosing a religion and it protect institutions against religious extremists.

[Franz Fanonipants]

Religion is bad for progress when it get involved in politics and guide the decisions of what is allowed and what is not in society in general.

With a clear separation between politics and religion this risk is nearly nonexistent.

A secular society is a win win for both side; it protect citizen choice of expressing and choosing a religion and it protect institutions against religious extremists.

lol

not a single mention of capital to be found.

focusing on "extremism" is a distraction from criticizing capitalism.

[MaximMK]

I agree it will be ok if they stay out of politics which is not the case in many states like mine with these right wing parties but it also causes people to divide. Ill be ok with it if everyone respects each other not fight over religion because that is absurd to fight over stories.

[danyboy27]

lol

not a single mention of capital to be found.

focusing on "extremism" is a distraction from criticizing capitalism.

I omitted capital beccause i assumed that everyone here would understand that when i was talking about the mean of production too when i was talking about governement and politics.

extremism have indeed its roots in the system but i have big doubt that it will completely disappear even after the fall of capitalism.

[danyboy27]

I agree it will be ok if they stay out of politics which is not the case in many states like mine with these right wing parties but it also causes people to divide. Ill be ok with it if everyone respects each other not fight over religion because that is absurd to fight over stories.


and that why a secular society is something religious and non-religious should talk with eachother more often.

Beccause ultimately everybody will get out of this deal winner.

[MaximMK]

Even if the government doesn't use the religion there will still be people that will fight over it. The hatred in my country between Christians and Muslims is really big and clearly religion is not helping and not doing its cause. It is a primitive thing to be forgotten and not for this world. We should base our unity on common sense and solidarity not on some fake god.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Oh, Jimmie, with your atheism 3.0 :)Ha, is that really a thing?

[tradeunionsupporter]

In my opinion yes.

[Dr Mindbender]

Holy shit
http://www.armyofgod.com/

This is how a pro life terrorist sees himself-

http://www.armyofgod.com/POCScottRoederArtWorkPic2.jpg