« Religion doesn't add anything to human experience | Main | Mental "avalanche" can cascade you to a better place »

October 10, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Hi there,

It's by the scientific process of thinking about doing something, doing it, seeing the results, then revising how you go about doing something that we see the results of our moral decisions. It just makes sense to be decent to others, not cheat on your spouse, and refrain from robbing banks. The logic of morality and the way that so many atheists and nonreligious people act truly good and loving (and so many Christians are bigots, gossips, cheats, etc.) helped me to get to where I am now- questioning the faith I've believed since I was a young girl. I'll have to check out a Sam Harris book in this process.



Isn't it quite simple don't do to others what u would not want done to you.

Not sure science or religion have anything more to say.

Why make judgments about anyone? When Christ said "Judge not, lest ye be judged" I think that was quite beautiful. And He also said that we should limit our dialogue to the basics "yes" or "no". Take it literally? No. Understand what Christ is saying about too much judging of one another, too much condemnation which destroys the spirit of peace, brotherhood and love.

When He said "Let the one without sin cast the first stone" He gave the world a gift. And he forgave the adulteress without question. He did not ask her to pledge her allegiance to Him. He just told her not to sin anymore. He freed her of the prejudice, hatred and cruelty of religious and scholarly dogma that was about to stone her to death.

This danger did not simply come from the priesthood, but from the rabbinical scholars as well. The danger of killing each other from sheer hatred is not always held in check by intellect or understanding, but by great intellect and great understanding such hatred has often been escalated to a frightening degree of destruction. The engineers and biologists working for Hitler believed and acted so.

You may not believe Jesus was "God" or you may not believe in any religion. But these teachings, when we have faith in them, take us beyond the finger-pointing of religious dogma. They are a stairway to happiness.

You don't have to believe everything attributed to Him in the Bible. You are free to believe what appeals to you.

That is what freedom from dogma is all about. And that includes freedom from the dogma of scientism, a belief, a religion that tries to use science, coopt science to promote political and philosophical views.

You don't have to be a scientist to believe what appeals to you. Just so long as you accept your choice as your own, without having to lean on the excuse that you are following "Christianity" or "Sant Mat" or "Baba Ji" or "Guru...." or "Science" or "Buddhism" as the excuse.

If you are going to be free, why not learn to say "It just appeals to me..." and not need anything else?

It is only when we try to prove we are right and someone else is wrong that we get into this problem. If you are a true scientist, then you accept the world as it is. Or, as a good scientist, you focus on a limited area that you can do something helpful with.

So you can believe and have faith in these teachings of Christ because they resonate as the highest expression of morality and kindness. If they do for you.

Or you can try to pick them apart, or claim Christ must have been very ignorant since He didn't live in the modern technical age. You can make science your religion, too, but then you miss the point of science, which is open minded, investigatory, learning and letting go of misunderstandings without blaming anyone.

Science is not the practice of witch hunts, public torture or execution and tribunals, even by intellectuals. Though intellectuals have used their own beliefs to do this much to the character and careers of others. Then it is just politics.

And when intellectuals use it to wield power over the "ignorant" they become ignorant. The point of science is open-ended, free of politics. It is not to wield power but to free ourselves and then to help each other to be free.

It is the unfolding of understanding through investigation and the withholding of judgment.

When it is used to "prove" something that has money and politics behind it, it is no longer science in the pure sense, but in an applied sense, and applied in very corruptible ways - as evidenced by big money pharma research, big money military research.....

And true science is faith in your hypothesis. Complete and total faith. Every good scientific experiment requires the utmost dedication, often our whole lives in pursuit of the understanding of one principle of nature. You must carry the ability to believe in what has yet to be proven to be a good scientist. Enough faith to actually construct and complete real investigation, real experimentation. Not something you brag about to others, talk about to others. Something which you do for its own intrinsic value to you.

Is the point of science to publish papers? Or to find the truth, and then, in the best way you can, objectively communicate that to your community?

When the scientist gets lost in the interpersonal and political and career dynamics of publish or perish, popular or poverty, then what they are doing becomes tainted, and you get false results, false reporting. And it can take years of work simply to disprove the false reports of a desired scientific outcome that has become popularly accepted simply because it is attractive.

But why not believe in an active principle rather than in one's own negative judgment of others? And why use the excuse of science to believe what appeals to you personally?

I think Christ got it right. And science can add only to the extent that it is much healthier to laugh and accept the world as it is, healthier to help others rather than to tear them down.

You can choose to be a warrior, if you like, but it isn't necessary. You can also be peaceful. And maybe that is healthier, too.

If something doesn't appeal to you, fine. But if you must act to harm or destroy it, then own your own veiled hatred. Rather than find "objective reasons" to hate. That is backwards, then.

Love or Hate. It is a purely subjective choice. Once you make it, naturally, there are all sorts of reasons to justify either choice.

And if you can't make the choice, if you are a fence-sitter, own that too.

But the Lover can't hate the hater, because then the lover is no longer a lover. And the Hater can't give up hating, much as they pretend to love, unless they accept they will no longer be a hater, and grieve the loss of hate, and let go all their character traits built upon it.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.