[alancalverd]

We prevent people from doing  many stupid and dangerous things by education, passing on the summary of hard experience about poisons, predators, jagged rocks, icy water, and so forth. But where religion is taught in schools it is either presented as a set of mandatory practices and beliefs, or as something to be respected  (even in the USA, where the former is forbidden ). That is perverse. How, in the light of all the harm done in the name of faith, can you respect the denial of enquiry and criticism?

So no need for censorship (which is very much the weapon of religious organisations), but an emphasis on thinking for yourself, including questioning the validity of your own thoughts. It all comes back to my objective in reply #4 above, of preventing religion from taking root.

[paul cotter]

By education we hope to prevent people doing stupid things, sometimes it works and sometimes it fails. I am not arguing with you concerning the bloodshed and mayhem that organised religion is responsible for- we are at one regarding that. What I am saying is that it is in man's nature to seek answers for the "whys" and since there are no valid answers to these questions, religion, de novo, is bound to arise even if it had previously been supressed.

[alancalverd]

My suggestion is not to suppress religion, but to build a civilisation where superstition never arises in the first place. If you teach kids that "why" is meaningless in terms of the origin of the universe and suchlike (see para 2 of reply # 13 above) your civilisation will avoid a lot of the pitfalls of philosophy. Perhaps we should add Russell's Principia Mathematica to the bookshelf, or at least the Open University Mathematics Foundation course, where set theory is presented rather more gently.

After a few more exchanges, I may have to write my own version of Brave New World and Last and First Men.

[paul cotter]

If you teach kids not to ask about the "whys", do you think that will work? People are told base jumping is an inherently dangerous pursuit yet it is still practiced. Things that are forbidden are often the focus of increased curiosity. Knowledge can be vertically transmitted but unfortunately wisdom cannot.

[Petrochemicals]

I quite like this one Alan

[alancalverd]

If you teach kids not to ask about the "whys", do you think that will work?

I would simply teach them that "why" implies an external agent that stands to benefit from the action. So you can reasonably ask why an animal (or even a plant) does something, but in the absence of  a demonstrable agent and potential benefit thereto, the question is meaningless.

Thus "how does the universe work?" is a reasonable question to which we are gradually finding the answer, but "why does it exist" is a waste of words. It's just a matter of precise use of language.

[alancalverd]

I quite like this one Alan

I never did.

[Petrochemicals]

I quite like this one Alan

I never did.

Oh, I thought you would have appreciated the brass jazzy aspects.

If we are to get rid of religion and stop people asking why, we must either get rid of scientists or stop people thinking such questions as what lies at the edge of the universe?

[alancalverd]

Oh, I thought you would have appreciated the brass jazzy aspects.

I've played too many similar pieces, just counting bars and waiting for something to happen. And when it does, it is usually predictable. The downside of brass bands with "modern" pretensions.

we must either get rid of scientists or stop people thinking such questions as what lies at the edge of the universe?

"What?" isn't "why?" It's a perfectly sensible question because it doesn't presume anything.

On further contemplation, I can see a huge difference between the spurious and demonstrably dangerous and divisive religions that rely on anthropic gods, and the more rational and less harmful beliefs of many aboriginal groups who acknowledge some sort of "life force" in their ecology, to the point of respecting their prey and their ancestors.  This is entirely consistent with scientific enquiry and good behavior.

[paul cotter]

I do not think we can restrict what questions may be asked. It is simply human nature to ask all the "hows", "whys", "whens", "wheres" and many others. Humans are incredibly inquisitive, valid and outright dumb questions are regularly posed. I cannot imagine a scenario where a lot of the "whys" are not raised. Simply telling someone that asking why will not yield a profitable answer will just increase curiosity as to the reasons for this logical cul-de-sac.

[alancalverd]

And I have explained the reason, clearly and succinctly. "Why" only has meaning if there is an external agent with a purpose, and since "the universe" means "everything", there cannot be an external anything.

By all means ask why humans tolerate and even venerate parasites like Justin Welby or Donald Trump (two real mysteries) and why such parasites preach nonsense to their victims (sex, money, power).  But realise that only an agent can have purpose, so in the absence of an agent the question is void.

[paul cotter]

There is nothing whatsoever in your last post, #30 , that I can find disagreement with, but you are missing my point. Human nature dictates that the why questions will be asked and there is no way of preventing this.

[alancalverd]

Agreed. But a little education as to the limited validity of the question may prevent our new civilisation from collapsing under the acquired filth of religion.

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi.

But a little education as to the limited validity of the question may prevent our new civilisation from collapsing under the acquired filth of religion.

    OK @alancalverd,  I guess that you don't always get to your chosen place of worship (church, temple etc.) right on time every week.    That's ok.
     However, I can't really put the "best answer" on your post because I'd be at risk of offending quite a few people and that may not be completely in-line with the Forum acceptable usage policy.

Do not use insulting, aggressive, or provocative language.
    [  subsection 2 of the A.U.P.      https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=8535.0  ]

    Insulting every religion is something I'm not sure we can do.   However, you've put a lot of time into making replies and responses and in most other respects you would have had the best answer award.   Thank you for your time and well done.   
     I may not be following this thread after today and so there may not be any "best answer" given out.   Thank you to everyone who has made a reply.

Best Wishes.

[paul cotter]

Well then, give it to me!! Of course I am joking as I have not the slightest interest in any accolade. I just enjoy the discourse here, especially my jousts with Alan. And of course the learning of new facts and understandings.

[alancalverd]

    Insulting every religion is something I'm not sure we can do. 

There is no need for us to do so. Most of them insult all the others, and all of them claim to be at least better than all the others. Unlike detergents, there is no objective test of any of them, but current events in the Middle East and Myanmar  demonstrate how they can destroy civilisations.

Last night I attempted to bring a taste of civilisation (live music) to a group seated in a place where they appear to worship a Roman instrument of torture - a huge illuminated crucifix. Strange things, people.

[Eternal Student (OP)]

Hi.

   That's a nice reply and can have the best answer award.

And of course the learning of new facts and understandings.

    I'm sure you're smart enough to realise that not everything in the forum is the gospel truth.

Best Wishes.

[Petrochemicals]

Last night I attempted to bring a taste of civilisation (live music) to a group seated in a place where they appear to worship a Roman instrument of torture - a huge illuminated crucifix. Strange things, people

"Onward Christian Soldiers marching as to war"?

[alancalverd]

   That's a nice reply and can have the best answer award.

Perhaps we need to have a "nicest answer" or "future diplomat" box, since however civilised and gentlemanly it was, it didn't actually address the question!   

[paul cotter]

Many thanks, Eternal Student, for this most auspicious and illustrious award, even though I feel I did not deserve or desire it. Anyway I like your idiom of "gospel truth" concerning the forum contents!