Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
First of all, science cannot unite people simply because that is not its function. It is impossible, roughly speaking, to rally around Ohm's law.
Moreover, the view of science as something unified, rational, good, and eternal is a naive ideological construct that is far from reality. There were and still are many sciences, and different scientific models can sometimes collide with each other as well as religious wars.
For example, please tell us how science united everyone in the Soviet era. For example, there were some scientists who adhered to Lysenko's views – did they strongly unite with the supporters of genetics? And in general, the scientists who criticized the wrong “bourgeois science”? Or, for example, in the Third Reich there was such a scientist Josef Mengele. He studied medicine and conducted forced experiments on concentration camp prisoners. Did he unite whom with whom?
Therefore, if we look at history at least a little objectively, we can easily see that the history of science, like the history of religion, is full of rather ambiguous passages. There was everything: lobotomy, race theory, social Darwinism, etc.
This doesn't mean that science is bad by definition. On the contrary, science is very cool. But to hope that some kind of scientific self-regulation will save science from destroying humanity is rather silly. Science is a good tool, but this tool must be in good hands. How these hands will be prepared is a separate question. Possible answers include ideologies, religions, and philosophies. Which option is better is an open question.
As for religion, religion really brings people together. This is one of its main social functions. And if we look at the evolution of religion, we will see that all this evolution was reduced to an ever-increasing expansion of the zone of unification. First, one tribe was united, then one city, then one people, and later there were religions that began to try to give even wider coverage, in the long run uniting all of humanity.
Today, religions face a very serious challenge: to move from rallying on the principle of “friends” and “strangers” to rallying all people without exception, and also regardless of religion. Many trends in modern religiosity are directed in this direction, although there is a strong reaction against this in the form of religious fundamentalism.
Therefore, whether religions will be able to cope with this challenge is a question that we will see answered in the near future.
You even wrote the essence in the question itself: that science is one (I mean science as a system of views and even as a worldview), and it is one. And there are many religions. It is easier for people to be united under the “flag” of something holistic and self-sufficient, such as science. There are, of course, physicists who claim that chemistry is not a science, but an offshoot of physics. Or astronomers who laugh at nerds. But these are not such acute issues that they can be compared with the confrontation, for example, between Christianity and Islam in human history. Perhaps, in many respects, conflicts on the basis of religion are numerous because religion is inscribed in the” body ” of society, forcing it to change under the influence of religious trends. Then the painfulness of religious issues has an impact on people's daily lives. And scientific dogmas in ordinary life, it happens, are neglected, even if unconsciously, only people for whom it is important fight for scientific truth.
Well, imagine a picture: a German, an Italian, a Turk, a Chinese, a Russian and a Moldovan gathered and went to Spain to study religion. Such a group came to me to do science right this week.
For example, Israel, the United States, Japan, France and Canada send representatives to help Jordan build the largest mosque in the Middle East and select prayers for it. The Scientific Council of the SESAME Synchrotron is designed exactly like this.
Religion unites us. And disconnects. Divides people into US and THEM.
And science is the experience of humanity. Presented in a convenient form. No more and no less. The scientific community is essentially international, worldwide. Despite all the complexities of personal and state relations.
In science, only a few people really understand it. The rest have either enthusiastic praise or skeptical rejection. Both have nothing to do with science. So there is no need to talk about unification. Religion can unite millions of people, but only if these people themselves choose to unite, and not quarrel.
People are united by the laws of the universe. Since the universe is nothing more than all the sciences combined.All sciences simply try to prove the existence of the laws of the universe separately and this is simply unrealistic the laws of the universe are the laws by which everything in the universes lives. And the laws of the universe are nothing but philosophy and philosophy is nothing but religion. that is, people are united by the right religion or philosophy.
What most people have in common is the ignorance of tk. Even among scientists, there are some who are so ignorant that they are rarely found in the backwoods slums of the Amazon… Sometimes some of our “scientists” stuff such a thing that you can be disappointed in any science at times …
People are united by both science and religion, but when people unite, they begin to divide again in science and religion. It's like an hourglass, how many of them do not turn, and the result will not change, although it seems that something is being done. But the knowledge that forms civilizations really unites people. Simply put, it combines practical information that has been proven over time. The culture of ancient civilizations that have existed for thousands of years may be interesting. The same Harappan (Proto-Indian) civilization. In it, people of different nationalities came together and lived together for thousands of years.
Of course, religion unites people more. The integration function of religion, which was highlighted by the founder of sociology E. Durkheim, is one of the most important. Shared ideas about God and rituals create a collective.�
Science is not able to perform such a function simply because any ordinary person can become a member of a religious group. But to unite around scientific interests (in any form), special knowledge is required.
Clearly, religion unites people more, at least in our reality it is so. Here is my list of reasons why I believe this is so.
Religion has places where it gathers believers, but science does not.
Believers are motivated to let as many people as possible know about their faith, but scientists are the opposite.
Religious people believe that all people are equal, and scientists believe that the strongest wins.
Religious people have holidays that were created to unite believers, scientists do not have such holidays or there are very few of them.
Believers have rituals that they perform together, or that can be discussed later, but scientists do not have such rituals.
Ideally, all believers have one single goal, while scientists have many.
Believers are united by the same norms and canons, but scientists do not have this.