We always talk about how science strives to improve humanity whereas religion only holds back progress.But what exactly is "progress" in a moral sense? Is it always good? "Science" may talk about if we can create a thing, but what about should we create a thing? It's all thanks to science that we created dangerous things like napalm, machine artillery, nukes, AI deepfakes, microplastics, biohazards, and other things that are putting humanity on the brink of extinction. Was religion just doing us a favor?
>>16805569Post the full version faggot
>>16805569> the hole left by the christian dark agesthat must be it. It couldn't have anything to do with the collapse of the roman empire
If you're not a fat kid it's obvious that "science" is a broad topic that includes objectively good things along with debatable things.We got no benefit from teaching people that the Earth is flat for centuries after we developed the means to prove that it is round. We would have been unequivocally better off embracing these facts earlier.We gained no benefit from persecuting left-handed people. It was a shit policy that improved nothing and caused much harm. Unambiguous.Now we're pretending that we can burn down an entire mountain range of coal and a whole ocean of oil and not taint the atmosphere. US Senators have claimed on the floor of Congress that the surface of the Earth is heating up because God wants it to.
>>16805569>We always talk about how science strives to improve humanityWrong, Science seeks how the material world works, it doesn't seek to improve humanity, humans can use these truths gleaned from it to improve themselves but they can also use it to fuck shit up as well. Science is a tool and tools can be used for good and evil.
>>16805585Without the collapse of the Roman Empire Europe would be a stagnant Chinese-like continent, Christian or pagan.
>>16805603but in the context of OP's image... The Roman Empire dominated Europe. When it collapsed, so did the economy, trade, the financial system, much of the civic improvements, and most of the luxury goods like art science and philosophy.
>>16805603maybe it would've been far better off like thatjust look at the state we are in right nowwe could be collapsing into an even more dramatic dark age in just a few decades
>>16805622There was a deterioration in post-Roman Europe for several centuries and then a massive surge of advancement, both of these wouldn’t have happened if Rome survived in the West. Of course in non-Roman Europe this development was linear.>>16805624Pretty odd statement. Obviously I don’t know Americans or liberalism couldn’t exist in this alternative timeline, but Europe would be far more primitive, it’d be more homogeneous, and it’s doubtful that the Americas would’ve been discovered.
>>16805636You’d basically have a pagan or Catholic Latin-speaking Byzantium.
>>16805569this graph should be relabeled "Jewish Usury"
Full version
>>16805728>german idealismtop jej
>>16805569Of all the mistakes of that graphic, one of the dumbest ones is implying that Egyptians were less technologically advanced than the Greeks.
>>16805569Religion is a science, its an older variant. Science is fundamentally seeking truth, explaining natural things, etc. Whats what religion does. How do you explain a thunder and weather to a cave man? Powerful entities. Further its a tool to explain human nature. A powerful entities experiencing human emotions. Its a study into human psyche.
>>16805569>he doesn't knowThe Christian dark ages aren't even the worst period of decline we've survived
>>16805569>We always talk about how science strives to improve humanity whereas religion only holds back progress.Both science and religion can produce dogmas that hold society back.
>>16805948how does science hold society back?
>>16805776Don't confuse spirituality/metaphysics with politics (aka religion)
>>16805569Name one thing "science" ever got right. I'll wait.
>>16806543>how does science hold society back?It can't. I said it produces dogmas that hold science back.People continue to call these dogmas science, but it is not.
>>16807579what are some examples of dogmas from science that can hold society back?
>>16807465That religiosity inversely correlates with IQ.
>>16807625That the Sun went around the Earth, which was taken as a scientific dogma for centuries until it was refuted by Galileo and Descartes. It is not considered outdated.
>>16807625The science of understanding the climate on earth changes has allowed dogmas such as humanity is non negligibly accelerating it. None of which is scientific, and provably a fraud. It's called science, but it's just a dogma meant to be taxation vehicles and control vehicles for the powerful.
