[alexasmyths]

"post-hoc Just World fallacy wrapped up in those same statements of faith"

Not really.

We have built a progressively more just world - and it gets a little bit more just and civilized every generation that goes by.

It's only possible when most people have some kind of faith, however crude, as the grind away at it. It does not happen by accident - over the long haul, it requires a Will.

[DamonHD]

It does NOT require any sort of religious will, and I posit that religion will be a steadily larger impediment to further progress if it does not fade.

We have better and more nuanced ways of making the universe more just these days.

[nine_k]

If you think that religious fervor is fading, look at all these people fighting for "just cases" of their choosing, from human rights to things like animal welfare. This fervor may be not attached to a belief in a particular deity, or something metaphysical at all. The feeling, and the mechanics, are still the same, to my mind.

[alexasmyths]

" that religion will be a steadily larger impediment to further progress if it does not fade"

Religion, which is the application of Spirituality (however crude) was essential to the development of morality in humanity, and hence civilization. Much of it has been codified and secularized, but the underlying metaphysical value remains the same and nothing has replaced it.

Scientific Materialists, who can't even seem to grasp that Religion and Spirituality aren't just about 'believing in random stuff' and that these issues are grounded in an existential metaphysical premise - are the real problem.

The combustion engine and nuclear energy are parlour tricks.

Morality and humanity ... much harder.

Progress is not actually hindered that much by some odd religious people worrying about 'too much adultery or gay marriage' - it's hindered by Scientific Materialism which presumes a universe ordered by a specific set of equations - a philosophy which taken to it's full extent implies we are merely random bags of noise, in a random Universe ... and therefore denies the very fact of life itself, let alone love, creativity, intelligence, knowledge, wisdom etc.. It underlines even our most obvious existential challenge: Global Warming (i.e. technology too advanced for our collective morality).

Materialism is ultimately an empty, nihilist world view.

I'm not worried because those who hold it, directly or indirectly so lack faith (I mean that loosely), don't see themselves as part of a greater whole, so much so that they're much less willing to reproduce, and form a bizarre 'end of the evolutionary trail' cohort. Those with at least an inkling of faith - even if only in their bones and not their hearts, let alone minds - will form the future, write future history, and shape creation going forward. And most people do have some kind of faith, actually.

There's hope in the fact that I find usually in the most ardent materialists, it's just a matter of ego. The ego is usually the thing standing between an individual an their own recognition of 'that which is greater'. The Buddhists put it in pretty good, nearly secular terms when they refer to 'egolessness', which is a good place to start for anyone interested in getting it.

The ancient world has a lot of similar Promethean-type myths (i.e. Lucifer etc.) - who brought us fire/light ... but it's the 'fire' or 'light' in our hearts and souls that matters, not literally 'fire', which useful, but ultimately, missing the point.

Hints - Colombia motto: "In Thy light shall we see light", Yale motto: "Light and Truth", Dartmouth Motto: "A voice crying out in the wilderness", Cambridge Motto: ""From here, light and sacred draughts" ...

EDIT: sorry for the lengthy rant :)

[kohanz]

It's a bit of a stretch (or at best a gross over-simplification) to exclusively group the concepts of religion/spirituality with love such that anyone who is not religious/spiritual must only care about "materialism". The rant is far too black & white, or us vs. them for my liking.

[alexasmyths]

It's not 'Science v Religion' ... it's 'Materialism v Spirituality' - this is the fundamental Metaphysical debate of our era, really.

[Gravityloss]

People don't like it if you tell them they can not feel love.

[alexasmyths]

Materialism would posit that not only can you not 'feel' love, but there is definitely no such thing as it in the first place.

Tell me were is 'love' among a bunch of completely random particles, bouncing through the Universe?

There isn't.

Ergo, while Materialism is an extremely useful tool for understanding much of the universe around us - we have to remember that this is all it is - a tool. Science is a Framework, not a Truth.

[Shorel]

> Religion, which is the application of Spirituality (however crude) was essential to the development of morality in humanity, and hence civilization.

As posited by religious people and writers of religious texts.

As a counterpoint, keep in mind that modern religions are massively syncretic and many of the moral issues were probably absorbed the same way some ancient cells absorbed mitochondria to create modern cells.

Also, that comment about nihilism is just misguided.

I feel as much spirituality in Carl Sagan vision of the stars being part of us and making us part of the universe, making us the universe observing itself, as you can feel with your books and promises of an afterlife.

I am going to die as well, and that fact makes my own life, and the lives of other people, the most sacred thing ever. No gods are needed to determine this fact.

[partingshots]

You’re a bit behind the times old friend. Nihilism and existential crisis is only the first half. Dig further for the truth. ;)