[stretchwithme]

Religion has hurt a great many people too.

Religious arguments are full of logical fallacies. Getting those pointed out a non-human with no axe to grind might help a lot of people find there way out of this trap more quickly.

When I was 22, I remember a taped debate about religion I had borrowed from my brother. It helped me figure out that there really was no proof for all the assertions that I had accepted as true.

Being able to reach that conclusion without being in a debate myself was very useful. I wasn't trying to protect my self image or save someone else.

In much the same way, computer intelligence might be just the thing many need to help them out of the maze. Especially if they can have a conversation with it and it can precisely point out an error. And if the same intelligence can deal successfully with other complicated problems and negotiations.

[justinsingh]

It sounds like you are under the assumption that all religious people view their religion as scientific explanations. Religious fundamentalists take their religion literally, but not everyone is a religious fundamentalist.

Regardless, I think that "Religion has helped a lot of people, it's also hurt a great many people too.. so let's just focus on converting people out of religion!" is a dangerous position that will cause harm to many. Scientific processes for finding truth (which are really just things that are the least false) and religion are two separate domains. I don't see an explanation of what "the trap/maze" is and why it demands to be detached from humanity.

[tluyben2]

But you can do that as a human too. The problem is that all ends with 'but you cannot prove that He does not exist ans the bible says people will try to discredit Him'. Religious people are not all to rational usually so why even have the conversation? In the EU I see religion dying rapidly; I live in a tiny (40odd people with a bigger 100 people village in the valley next to it) village in the south of Spain where I moved down to from Amsterdam. In Amsterdam I was used to people being atheist. Even my maroccan friends who do go to the mosques only go because it is social thing not because they believe. Same for my Jewish friends. In Spain I thought the old men and women at least would believe and I was surprised to find that they actually almost all do not. 'Don't be silly, I go to church because after that we drink a lot' says my neigbour.

Not sure why the US is so religious but the education and lifestyle will kill it. No AI needed.

[wyclif]

Not sure why the US is so religious but the education and lifestyle will kill it. No AI needed

I think you profoundly underestimate the power of both religion and philosophy on the soul and imagination of man. Back in the 16th century, the "new learning" confidently predicted it would sweep away religious belief and other forms of "antiquated" thinking. How silly and facile that seems now. The fedora-clad New Atheists are no different—arrogantly predicting the demise of something far more powerful and permanent than they are.

[tluyben2]

Like said besides the US and the middle east I do not see that in reality. And I do not underestimate the power of religion or philosophy: I just think only the latter will remain. Or hope it will. And it is not really silly yet: that is only a few 100 years ago. It takes time to get all humanity out of poverty, not dying young and educated. If we still believe in some intelligent entity(ies) that architected the universe and life in 2000 years you can call it silly. I for one find it silly that people believe in such an entity while I was raised and schooled as a christian until I was 20. But I started doubting it and asking questions that were answered with 'the bible says so ; do not doubt!' at a very young age. Which has the whole: everything points to this all being a nice story to keep the people quiet and docile and no science to back it up.

[wyclif]

you can call it silly

But I didn't call it silly; I said it should be taken seriously. And frankly, "because science says so!" can be just as dogmatic (or even more so) than religion. "Science" isn't a monad anyway; we can't simply reference one overarching, completely non-contradictory science. And there are Christian approaches to science that, in fact, do not resort to "do not doubt." And that's just for starters—it's very misleading to posit a "religion or science: choose one" duality given the number of Christians in STEM professions, from Faraday to Larry Wall.

As far as "not sure why the US is so religious"—I don't think the US is more religious than other cultures, or why you would single the US out for approbation in that way. It's probably the case that Christianity has influenced Western civilisation and that has been expressed in a particular manner in the US on the Constitution with its enumerated rights and ordered liberties. The influence of Christianity on the West has much to do with why Western cultures are advanced in terms of technology, literacy, general learning, and the arts, even when those things are used for non-religious ends.

[tluyben2]

I do think the US is more religious than other developed nations. Take high GDP places like Scandinavia and Swiss and Netherlands which are atheist. That is why. And I agree with you about the influence. I do not understand how educated people think this can work and why the US with smart people works like that.

[wyclif]

The USA isn't high GDP? Fascinating.