459
You google it if you like. You won't find it. (midwest.social)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/atheism@lemmy.world
110 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Science has and will continue to provide a lot of things that improve our lives. I only argue it has failed to deliver a sense of meaning on the scale of religion thus far.

If we believe in evolution then we must also believe that religion is an evolved advantage to our ancestors because it has formed over and over in all great civilizations past. It must have played and likely still plays some important role in the ability for humans to work together, live happily, and to be something bigger than the individual.

I don’t think forced religion is good people should have freedom of choice to include atheism. I also think it should be considered that it has had its place in history and probably still fills an important role.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The backpedaling is hard there. You were literally saying « science hasn’t found a sense of meaning » before. Now it’s « not on the scale » of religion.

    People don’t need either science nor religion to find a sense of meaning. It can be through family, friends, sport, traveling, charity, etc. I’d wager religion isn’t that big as a meaning giver that you think it is globally. A big part of why it helps people mentally has likely more to do with the sense of community provided by those groups than it is with the beliefs themselves in the first place. It’s the same as being in any social club. Mental health is mainly about our human interactions, not so much about out individual beliefs and such.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Science has not found meaning. I cannot point to any scientific discovery that tells why we exist or what our purpose is.

    It does provide meaning to some on a small scale who devote themselves to science.

    Both statements can be true. Science can provide meaning on a small scale without ever finding it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    You seem to have a very narrow view about meaning. You seem to only accept a definition of meaning which portrays one objective truth.

    Science doesn’t even claim that such universal meaning exists in the first place. It recognizes that meaning is a subjective feeling. A sense of meaning as you would say and what this comment thread was originally about.

    Besides, it’s very debatable that religion provides such explanation about our existence either. It all comes down to « because god » which isn’t meaning in itself, just a injunction to have faith. Religion hasn’t « found » any more meaning than science. Meaning in religion is provided through faith.

    Therapy (science) has helped many people directly find a sense of meaning in their lives on a large scale. But science has helped people find meaning in so many different ways. Science practicians such as doctors, engineers, teachers and so many other people find meaning because of it on a massive scale. People who don’t practice science also find meaning thanks to it because it enables them to live their passion, be creative, do good in the world, help others, etc. which are all actual meaning for people.

    People find meaning. It is not « found by » science or religion. Your semantics on that actually doesn’t make sense. People find meaning in something that provides what they resonate with. They can find meaning in religion, family, career, etc. and often it is not just one thing. Religion can’t find meaning but can help provide some.

    Your whole conception of meaning is flawed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago*

    Science has and will continue to provide a lot of things that improve our lives. I only argue it has failed to deliver a sense of meaning on the scale of religion thus far.

    That's like complaining that architecture hasn't provided a solution for world hunger. That's not its purpose.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent