To all the materialists who think the incredible designs of nature - including on fish, birds, flowers and even caterpillars - emerge from nothing more than the most reductionist scientific evolutionary forces, I joyously disagree with you.
177
136
88
1,697
I don’t think science is antithetical to religion at all. But “Spend more time supporting nature?” What does that even mean? The environmental crisis by the way derives much less from lack of study of nature & much more from the fact that not enough people stand in awe before it.
7
5
3
102
Science is p much definitionally antithetical to religious arguments/concepts.
3
2
No it’s not at all!
1
25
To certain of the supernatural claims made by religions over the centuries, I’d argue it is. Science can’t address many of the philosophical/moral questions, but it can address (and does necessarily negate) many of the supernatural tenets that are foundational to religions.
2
3
Replying to @mmmaaaaattttt
Spirituality is a very different thing than religious doctrine or dogma. And in fact it is not “supernatural,” so much as a deeper understanding of what is in fact natural.

Apr 5, 2021 · 2:09 PM UTC

2
21
Replying to @marwilliamson
Yes but spirituality doesn’t need to include claims that there is some force at work in the world/universe beyond what is observable and verifiable.
2
1
Replying to @marwilliamson @mmmaaaaattttt
That fuzzy feeling you get when you think the universe is talking to you is a physically reproducible phenomenon much more tied to serotonin signaling than an actual 'deeper understanding' of something.
1