@cofty, What I was saying about believing different ideas based on date and location is that it doesn't negate a truth claim just because there's variety. Richard Dawkins made two points:
1. People only believe religion because they are indoctrinated, so it isn't true.
2. If you were born somewhere/sometime else, you'd believe something else, so all religion is false.
My counterpoint to #1:
The truth is, all knowledge we have is indoctrinated. Science, math, languages, politics, history, etc. It's taught to us for free for twelve years and more if you please. Yet, just because we were indoctrinated to believe all of it does not mean it's all false. Religion isn't any different. I used science as an example not because I'm some creationist that fights the flow of science (I'm not), but because the science you learn is also indoctrinated from a very young age throughout your adulthood. It does not negate it's legitimacy.
Apart from that, as I mentioned before, there has been an international revival of religiosity. Sociologists were predicting in the 80's that by our time religion would diminish to near non-existence. In fact, great intellects have been predicting that for centuries. Historically, secularism is always a trend and trends do NOT always predict the future. Deism was popular during the Enlightenment era, positivism was popular during the late 19th century and early 20th century, existentialism dominated philosophers for a solid century, etc. It's funny, there's been a remarkable resurgence of theism with modern-day philosophers.
Counterpoint to #2:
Different ideas based on time and location also does not negate its legitimacy. I used examples of how science has modified its teaching over time. Yet, with the logic of point number two, science too should be nothing more than a fraud. But it's not. All knowledge is taught without inherently knowing it, such as science, history, mathematics, and *gasp* religion. That does not mean it isn't true.
Addressing this point of religion and violence, religion has been a minority of problems throughout history. Religion has been the cause of only 7% of all wars, 2% of all deaths from wars, and not even half a percent of all deaths throughout human history. It's nothing more than propaganda. If we're speaking about specific religions here, Islam is responsible for the vast majority of religion-related deaths and over half of all religious wars. The 20th century was the bloodiest century in all of human history, which was dominated entirely by secular wars.
You did not debunk my point about Darwinism. I wasn't saying it wasn't true, I was saying science birthed Darwinism which people used as a justification for genocide, like with Hitler. Hitler's greatest influences were Darwin and Nietzsche (19th-century existentialist philosopher), which he largely used to justify his abhorrent evils. You're sidestepping my point.
You're also sidestepping my point on weapons of mass destruction. You instead went on about the contributions science has made, which I'm not disagreeing on. Science is wonderful. However, science has also undoubtedly made some frightening inventions as well. You say, "What we do with science is a moral decision," yet I say the same about religion. Religion is a tool for people to find spirituality, yet what people do with that is a moral decision. You're applying a double standard for religion simply because you don't like it. What we do with ANYTHING is a moral decision. No one blames the gun for the killing, they blame the killer! What I am trying to convey about science creating weapons of mass destruction is that I could blame science for all the killings in the past century, yet you wouldn't be too fond of that and it would be a logical fallacy. It's the same thing with religion.
What I was also trying to say about the broken condition of man is that the real root of all evil isn't science, religion, politics, etc. It's the broken condition of humanity. All of those topics are neutral and don't care one way or the other, but humans aren't neutral. This Enlightenment idea of evil coming from purely outside sources and not us couldn't be further from the truth. When it comes down to someone dropping an atomic bomb (science), a terrorist beheading a woman for not wearing her hijab (religion), or a politician starting a new war (politics), these are all the results of decisions made by humans. Not religion, science, or politics, but humans. Which reveals there is something internally broken inside of all of us. Obviously to differing degrees as we're not all war-mongers, but our brokenness exists nevertheless. Also, the most fair and peaceful world is entirely untrue! The 20th century was bloodier than the previous 19 centuries combined! Are you aware of the tensions among nations throughout the entire world? The immense poverty and starvation? The middle east? World War 3 could be right around the corner and you're saying we're living the best period of time in human history.
You should also thank religion for science, since the world of modern science was birthed out of the church! For centuries it was the church that funded new discoveries in science. All of the greatest scientists for centuries were deeply religious, mainly Catholics as well. There are plenty of religious charities that have fed the hungry and cured the sick. The Catholic church is the largest provider of healthcare in the world. Feed My Starving Children, Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc. All religious organizations or founded on the basis of religion. Also, Yale, Oxford, Princeton and Harvard? Started out as seminaries. Some of these schools even still have religious mottos. Thank goodness religion existed to get the ball rolling on all of that!
Also, as for China believing in different fossil records, Google Peking Man and what the Chinese believe about it.
Thank you for taking the time to read all of my posts despite how large they grow, I truly appreciate it. Dialogue like this is fun. You are a bright fella as well.
