Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AntonioLao the belief that this one universe we are in obeys laws that can be described by physics and mathematics. But laws based on morality and ethics do seem to transcend physical or mathematical descriptions.
If religion is the adherence of laws, only the ones derived from physics and math can be considered as universal and absolute, while the ones derived from ethics are relative to their cultural origins and can be subjected to change in time and space as witnessed through human history. Laws that vary thru time and space contain a weakest link for stability, longevity or prosperity. |
Math is a construct of the human mind as much as morality and ethics, it just seems more reputable because it is more basic (ei. the numbers 1,2,3 are more basic than the concept of good/evil).
Religion in a society is always used, as science is, as a way to explain the unknown. You ask the question "Where did we come from?" The spiritualist will explain that God put us here, the scientist will explain that we are a highly organised form of energy BUT the spiritualist cannot logically deny that God may have made him out of energy, nor can the scientist argue that the energy could not have been created by God!
A constructive religion suggests order in the cosmos, which encourages people to look for underlying rules (both Newton and Einstein are excellent examples of this. Their faith inspired their science.) A destructive religion encourages control and manipulation and depresses reasoned thought (i'm sure we can all think of examples here) but the same comparison can be made between open (constructive) and enchrenched (destructive) scientific dogma.
Religion, like Goverment or any other type of large scale human organisational structure, is neutral and it is the people involved and the ideas that determine it's net benefit or harm...