Quote Originally Posted by Polymirize
Compared to itself of course. Just because science self-evaluates better than religion I need to accept it as the pinnacle? not at all. I think science is begging for a new paradigm shift myself.
Of course science is the pinnacle of critical self-evaluation. How could it not be? The definition of science is critical evaluation of evidence using logic to arrive at theories to explain the universe. If you're not self-evaluating, you're not doing science properly. Science doesn't need to change; only the scientists themselves.
"God is a dangerous idea"... sure. So is freedom. So is love. So is everything that makes the human experience worthwhile.
How are freedom and love dangerous? If everybody were really free and loving, what would be so dangerous about that? I think that would be a pretty non-dangerous, worthwile human experience myself.
I'm sure all religious people are just as bad as you say. Afterall, you have empirical data I presume. I'm sure that all the problems are really religious, as opposed to being cultural, or economic.
I didn't say all religious people are bad. I said religion is bad, the God myth is bad. Just the same way that racism and alcoholism are bad for society but not all racists and alcoholics are necessarily bad people (and of course, anyone is free to be a racist or an alcoholic if they so choose). Granted, there are many problems that are just cultural or economic in origin, and I would like to see sweeping changes in those areas of human affairs as well (read my signature). But religious faith is no doubt a big part of the problem, and it's wholly unnecessary.