Is Human Civilization More Likely To Be Destroyed By Science Or Religion?

[cbayer]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/25/richard-dawkins-daily-show_n_3988506.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

The Huffington Post | By Nick Wing
Posted: 09/25/2013 10:29 am EDT

Richard Dawkins, one of the world's most outspoken atheists and author of a new book, appeared on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" on Tuesday to discuss some rather deep thoughts about religion, science and the potentially catastrophic intersection of the most extreme forms of the two.

Jon Stewart asked Dawkins whether the end of human civilization was more likely to come through "religious strife or scientific advancement."

Dawkins, a frequent and controversial critic of religion, replied that a popular theory gave the human race about a "50 percent chance of surviving through the 21st century." This effective coin flip would be determined by a number of factors, Dawkins said, in which both science and religion were likely to play a part.

Dawkins ultimately said he believed that religious fanatics with access to the most destructive products of science posed the biggest danger to human civilization. Stewart countered, arguing that science contained certain risks in and of itself, in the form of extreme or incautious advancement.

more at link, including video

[rrneck]

1. Human civilization will be destroyed by humans. nt

[hrmjustin]

2. Maybe both can work to stop humans from destroying themselves.

[cbayer]

3. Great answer justin.

[hrmjustin]

5. Thanks.

[rug]

11. Which is more likely to do that?

[Lawlbringer]

4. Science can build Terminators and Gray Goo.

Religion will turn them into zealots bent on human eradication and the consumption of the entire universe...


in His holy name, of course.

[LostOne4Ever]

6. Neither.

We are all going to be destroyed when the Vogons destroy the earth to make way for a hyperspacial express route.

We should have paid more attention to the notices they left us on Alpha Centauri for the last 50 years.

[leveymg]

7. Art & Music are the agents of human extinction.

Behold, Vishnu, the Destroyer of Worlds:



And, Fate:

[Jim__]

8. I wish he would have asked whether it would be reason or passion.

Clearly if we wipe ourselves out, it will be through a combination of reason and passion.

Jon Stewart said he thinks the last phrase uttered on earth will be, "It worked." He may well be right. If any experiment has the possibility of ending civilization (and we are not in a situation where the experiment is necessary for our immediate survival), reason dictates that we not perform the experiment - it's not worth the risk. However our passionate curiosity could drive us to do it. Both reason and passion are part of what it means to be human. Reason may give us the capability of wiping ourselves out. Passion will push us to use that capability.

[cbayer]

10. Agree - the combination has the capacity to destroy us all, but perhaps the combination

can lead to our survival as well.

[AtheistCrusader]

9. Only one can save our species when the sun starts burning helium.

[skepticscott]

12. False and silly choice

"Scientific advancement" will not bring about the end of human civilization in any event. Ignorance, arrogance, self-indulgence, complacency, fanaticism, lack of foresight, and confidence in supernatural beings to save us from ourselves may, but not science.

Scientific discoveries are tools..nothing more. They can't solve all of our problem or answer all of our questions. Like all tools, they can be used wisely or unwisely, constructively or destructively. Humans have an endless capacity for the latter in each case, but don't blame the method of acquiring knowledge for that.

[dimbear]

13. Science keeps the children from dying and religion insists you have 5 or 6, result catastrophe.

The question is like asking whether the hanged man died from the rope or the bar it was tied to.

[cbayer]

14. Science also created atomic weapons, while some religious groups feed the hungry.

[dimbear]

15. Absolutely. Likewise, science creates better birth control. It's only the trend the looks grim.

A numbers game.

[skepticscott]

16. What you fail to say

is that science doesn't use atomic weapons, or threaten to use them, or dictate how they should be used. Politicians and religious fanatics do that.

[okasha]

17. I seem to recall that no one involved in the insane

arms race of the 1950's-1970's was a religious fanatic. JFK? Kruschev? Lyndon Johnson? Mao Tse Tung? Don't think so.

Meanwhile, their tame scientists went on to develop MIRV'd missles, Agent Orange, weaponized anthrax and any number of other war toys.

[pinto]

18. Interesting back and forth with Dawkins and Stewart.

Kind of lost track of the discussion at Dawkin's extraterrestrial meme. But was interesting to see that some agreement was on the table about the benefit / harm of *both* established science and established religion.

[uriel1972]

19. The tools science gives us in the hands of fanatics is my guess... nt