# Religion has Never Bettered the World
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [August 5, 2009, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393 "2009-08-05T05:25:57Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 7
### Author:  [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/121 "2009-08-07T01:21:31Z")
> [@Cisco](#):
>
> I can’t argue with you if you’re willing to lie. . . .
Do not accuse other posters of lying in Great Debates.
[/Moderating]
---
### Author:  [@Calculon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Calculon)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/122 "2009-08-07T01:52:59Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> The Greeks invented many interesting things, but they had no motive to use it without a market economy. And since each inventor was largely going off into his corner and doing his own thing, rather than trading papers around telling other people why they were wrong, the scientific method wasn’t invented. Hence you got things like the sustained belief that heavier objects fell faster, holding for no greater reason than that no one could be bothered to actually run tests.
> I’m focussing on improvements to the health, kindness, and happiness of mankind. That these happen in parallel to material gain is almost certainly not accidental, but that’s beside the point. If there were deities running the world, and deities are supposed to improve the health, kindness, and happiness of mankind, they had thousands of years in which to do it. During that time period, lots of different gods and moralities had their chance, but the output was the same regardless of which you chose.
>
> There is more art and literature being produced now than at any other time in history, per capita.
I think here you are making a category mistake. “Science” or technology cannot be compared with “Religion” as a comparison of worldviews. Science is in of itself not a worldview, merely an empistimological methodology, one that can be used by both the religious and non-religious alike.
Science, to be effective, needs both people willing to fund and carry out research, as well as people and funding to apply that research. “Science” itself contains no reason why anyone should do either. It is up to the overarching worldview (whether religious or non-religious) to determine whether or not the research and its application is a good use of resources or not.
Religious people have always used current technology in their efforts to help their fellow humans. To try and drive a wedge between “Science” and “Religion” in this fashion is I think misguided. The real question is whether non-religious people would use technology to the same extent as the religious to help people. Since the available data shows that atheists are less likely to be charitable, the answer is not obviously yes. The choice is not between religious people who build prayer centers, and the non-religious that build hospitals. It appears that the choice is more between the religious who build both prayer centers and hospitals, and the non-religious who do nothing.
Secondly there are other objections to your argument. One is that the purpose of Christianity, and many other religions is not to make people healthy, wealthy and wise. The point of Christianity is being in relationship with God. That may or may not improve your life in different areas. But criticizing Christianity for not improving the health of the population when it makes no claim that it is able to do so completely misses the mark.
Thirdly it is far from clear that “Science”, even in your use of it, is in fact a net positive for society. For while science has lead to the development of many good things, it has also lead to the development of truly horrific things as well. For instance in a world without science we would not have chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. In fact nearly all of the horrors of the 20th century, such as WWI, WWII and the Holocaust would have been impossible without 19th or 20th century technology. And with the effects of climate change and ever increasing pollution, again brought on by technology, it may well be that the increase in our health and wellbeing that we enjoy now may be quickly erased by the degradation of our planet that the same technology made possible.
Calculon.
---
### Author:  [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/123 "2009-08-07T04:57:40Z")
> [@Cisco](#):
>
> I want to know how come I never meet these liberal feel-good secular thoughtful introspective love-thy-neighbor Christians in real life. I’m only assured on the Straight Dope that they’re the majority. I’ve experienced nothing in the real world to support this. Evangelicals alone in the United States were over 80 million a couple years ago. That doesn’t include all the other conservative Christians.
First, I believe that the 80 million figure is high, though I may be wrong. Second, Evangelicals are not necessarily conservative.
---
### Author:  [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/124 "2009-08-07T05:21:19Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> The polio vaccine was created on the basis of ignoring Christian values. The modern economy relies on the creation of wealth via loaning. Before usury (charging interest to ones own people) was adopted in Europe, people didn’t loan money because there was no reason to. If Jesus had taught that loans were good and if the Catholic church hadn’t banned paper production in 1100, the polio vaccine could well have been invented 400 years earlier. Instead Jesus told us that usurers burn in Hell for eternity.
_Sigh_ Where to begin?
Jesus never told us that usurers burn in Hell for eternity, which rips apart your entire argument right there. The sayings of Jesus are recorded in the four gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. You can read them [here](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=1&version=31). And you probably should, before you report what Jesus said.
The Catholic Church banned paper production in 1100? I’m afraid you’re wrong about that one as well. It’s possible that you’re confused by the case of German Emperor Frederick II, who banned _cotton_ paper in 1228, because it was too fragile and he wanted writing done on longer-lasting parchment, but of course that’s quite different from banning all paper, and anyway Emperor Frederick wasn’t the Catholic Church.
(Much as I may disagree with your viewpoints, I can’t fault your imagination. If computer programming ever grows too tedious, perhaps you should try writing alternate history novels. It would be fascinating to explore what life would be like if your version of history had actually happened.)
---
### Author:  [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/125 "2009-08-07T05:43:01Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> I’m focussing on improvements to the health, kindness, and happiness of mankind. That these happen in parallel to material gain is almost certainly not accidental, but that’s beside the point. If there were deities running the world, and deities are supposed to improve the health, kindness, and happiness of mankind, they had thousands of years in which to do it. During that time period, lots of different gods and moralities had their chance, but the output was the same regardless of which you chose.
This is basically the central claim of your OP restated. In the 100+ posts since that OP, I and others have challenged you to defend that claim. You’ve mainly refused to do so. Repeating the claim won’t make it true. It simply is not the case that “the output was the same” in every society until the 19th century, and we’ve provided you a mountain of evidence why it wasn’t. Rather, it was the case that Christian society advanced more than any other. See post 38 or any of a dozen others.
---
### Author:  [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/126 "2009-08-07T05:54:42Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> And as Sampiro noted, it was the Quakers who spearheaded ending slavery. Quakerism is non-doctrinal sect of Christianity which encourages people to take nothing in the Bible as a rule nor suggestion, and rather use logic and common sense to figure out the right answer to morality. It was more doctrinal Christians who supported slavery.
Actually it wasn’t. It was the Catholic Church who spearheaded the end to slavery, and they are the most doctrinal Christians of all. Pope Paul III completely condemned slavery in his encyclical [Sublimus Dei](http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul03/p3subli.htm):
> [@](#):
>
> To all faithful Christians to whom this writing may come, health in Christ our Lord and the apostolic benediction.
>
> The sublime God so loved the human race that He created man in such wise that he might participate, not only in the good that other creatures enjoy, but endowed him with capacity to attain to the inaccessible and invisible Supreme Good and behold it face to face; and since man, according to the testimony of the sacred scriptures, has been created to enjoy eternal life and happiness, which none may obtain save through faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, it is necessary that he should possess the nature and faculties enabling him to receive that faith; and that whoever is thus endowed should be capable of receiving that same faith. Nor is it credible that any one should possess so little understanding as to desire the faith and yet be destitute of the most necessary faculty to enable him to receive it. Hence Christ, who is the Truth itself, that has never failed and can never fail, said to the preachers of the faith whom He chose for that office ‘Go ye and teach all nations.’ He said all, without exception, for all are capable of receiving the doctrines of the faith.
>
> The enemy of the human race, who opposes all good deeds in order to bring men to destruction, beholding and envying this, invented a means never before heard of, by which he might hinder the preaching of God’s word of Salvation to the people: he inspired his satellites who, to please him, have not hesitated to publish abroad that the Indians of the West and the South, and other people of whom We have recent knowledge should be treated as dumb brutes created for our service, pretending that they are incapable of receiving the Catholic Faith.
>
> We, who, though unworthy, exercise on earth the power of our Lord and seek with all our might to bring those sheep of His flock who are outside into the fold committed to our charge, consider, however, that the Indians are truly men and that they are not only capable of understanding the Catholic Faith but, according to our information, they desire exceedingly to receive it. Desiring to provide ample remedy for these evils, We define and declare by these Our letters, or by any translation thereof signed by any notary public and sealed with the seal of any ecclesiastical dignitary, to which the same credit shall be given as to the originals, that, notwithstanding whatever may have been or may be said to the contrary, the said Indians and all other people who may later be discovered by Christians, are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be outside the faith of Jesus Christ; and that they may and should, freely and legitimately, enjoy their liberty and the possession of their property; nor should they be in any way enslaved; should the contrary happen, it shall be null and have no effect.
>
> By virtue of Our apostolic authority We define and declare by these present letters, or by any translation thereof signed by any notary public and sealed with the seal of any ecclesiastical dignitary, which shall thus command the same obedience as the originals, that the said Indians and other peoples should be converted to the faith of Jesus Christ by preaching the word of God and by the example of good and holy living.
Given that, it’s not surprising that slavery ended in Catholic countries earlier than in countries with secular governments. It happened first in Mexico\*, where it was abolished in 1810, by a declaration written by a Catholic Priest. Over the next couple decades, abolition spread to other Catholic countries in Central and South America. By contrast, slavery was not abolished in the United States until 1863.
\*Actually, slavery was first abolished in 1791 in Haiti, by Black slaves killing and driving off their white masters.
---
### Author:  [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/127 "2009-08-07T05:56:42Z")
> [@Cisco](#):
>
> I guess every other city is a podunk shithole when you live in almighty NYC, but Phoenix _is_ the 5th largest city in the United States, you know.
Try a coastal city. Seawater makes you more liberal, apparently.
---
### Author:  [@Estilicon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Estilicon)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 10:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/128 "2009-08-07T10:22:23Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> The polio vaccine was created on the basis of ignoring Christian values. The modern economy relies on the creation of wealth via loaning. Before usury (charging interest to ones own people) was adopted in Europe, people didn’t loan money because there was no reason to. If Jesus had taught that loans were good and if the Catholic church hadn’t banned paper production in 1100, the polio vaccine could well have been invented 400 years earlier. Instead Jesus told us that usurers burn in Hell for eternity.
>
> It certainly was Christians, in majority, who created the modern world (which includes the polio vaccine). But they did it in spite of their religion, not because of it. The modern world has bettered the life for everyone by all measures, but that process didn’t start until ~1500 years after Jesus died. It’s rather hard to prove causality with that sort of delay.
Champ, this is GD. Stop spreading ignorance, baby Jesus cry when you do.
---
### Author:  [@Estilicon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Estilicon)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/129 "2009-08-07T10:25:22Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> The Greeks invented many interesting things, but they had no motive to use it without a market economy. And since each inventor was largely going off into his corner and doing his own thing, rather than trading papers around telling other people why they were wrong, the scientific method wasn’t invented. Hence you got things like the sustained belief that heavier objects fell faster, holding for no greater reason than that no one could be bothered to actually run tests.
The Greeks, particularly the Athenians, were one of the greatest traders the world has ever seen. Where do you get your information from?
---
### Author:  [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/130 "2009-08-07T12:20:11Z")
> [@Syntropy](#):
>
> Often enough, but perhaps not [factually enough](http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm).
You are not looking at the same group. Your statistic is for those with a particular announced religious affiliation. Mine is for those who practice a religion, for instance by regularly attending church (or mosque/temple/synagogue). [Cite.](http://www.heritage.org/research/religion/bg1064.cfm) Perhaps you didn’t notice where I said clearly that I was talking about “those who practice their religion”, not just profess it.
Regards,
Shodan
---
### Author:  [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/131 "2009-08-07T13:33:58Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> And as Sampiro noted, it was the Quakers who spearheaded ending slavery. Quakerism is non-doctrinal sect of Christianity which encourages people to take nothing in the Bible as a rule nor suggestion, and rather use logic and common sense to figure out the right answer to morality. It was more doctrinal Christians who supported slavery.
The thing is, though, too, a non-doctrinal religion is as much of a religion as a doctrinal one.
---
### Author:  [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/132 "2009-08-07T14:30:37Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> The Greeks invented many interesting things, but they had no motive to use it without a market economy. And since each inventor was largely going off into his corner and doing his own thing, rather than trading papers around telling other people why they were wrong, the scientific method wasn’t invented. Hence you got things like the sustained belief that heavier objects fell faster, holding for no greater reason than that no one could be bothered to actually run tests.
And yet when the renaissance kicked in and the enlightenment and all the other post-Roman periods we have had, they all found great inspiration in Greece and Roman texts, ideas and concepts. Half the symbols of the USA political system comes from Roman concepts. They might be used differently, but I recon that if classical times hadn’t been such a source of inspiration for them they would have called it something else. Of course one has to be near illiterate if one doesn’t think Greek writers and thinkers haven’t helped to make the world a more interesting place.
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> I’m focussing on improvements to the health, kindness, and happiness of mankind. That these happen in parallel to material gain is almost certainly not accidental, but that’s beside the point. If there were deities running the world, and deities are supposed to improve the health, kindness, and happiness of mankind, they had thousands of years in which to do it. During that time period, lots of different gods and moralities had their chance, but the output was the same regardless of which you chose.
You confuse religions with deities. Perhaps you meant your op to read: “Deities have Never Bettered the World”
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> There is more art and literature being produced now than at any other time in history, per capita.
And this proves what? Few people after all, claim that science hasn’t also contributed to the betterment of the human condition. But one does not rule out the other. Anyway it is a silly proposition to begin with. The world consists of individuals. All I have to show is one single individual for whom religions is a positive thing, and the world is a better place for it.
---
### Author:  [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/133 "2009-08-07T14:38:47Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#):
>
> The polio vaccine was created on the basis of ignoring Christian values. The modern economy relies on the creation of wealth via loaning. Before usury (charging interest to ones own people) was adopted in Europe, people didn’t loan money because there was no reason to. If Jesus had taught that loans were good and if the Catholic church hadn’t banned paper production in 1100, the polio vaccine could well have been invented 400 years earlier. Instead Jesus told us that usurers burn in Hell for eternity.
:dubious: That’s some tortured logic right there.
> [@](#):
>
> It certainly was Christians, in majority, who created the modern world (which includes the polio vaccine). But they did it in spite of their religion, not because of it. The modern world has bettered the life for everyone by all measures, but that process didn’t start until ~1500 years after Jesus died. It’s rather hard to prove causality with that sort of delay.
Man I wish I had the magical glasses you all had that could tell me what part of history was influenced by religion and what part wasn’t. To me it all seems like some sort of self-serving meta-narrative, but it’s clear that it’s just that I can’t see which parts of people are religious and which parts are trying to escape their religious yoke.
---
### Author:  [@Estilicon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Estilicon)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/134 "2009-08-07T14:50:16Z")
> [@](#):
>
> The Greeks invented many interesting things, but they had no motive to use it without a market economy. And since each inventor was largely going off into his corner and doing his own thing, rather than trading papers around telling other people why they were wrong, the scientific method wasn’t invented. Hence you got things like the sustained belief that heavier objects fell faster, holding for no greater reason than that no one could be bothered to actually run tests.
Yesterday I answered this very late in the evening and I wasn’t able to convey my sheer shock for reading such an ignorant thing here, in the SMDB.
As I said before the Greeks, unable to raise enough food and also to expand resorted to commerce in order to be able to feed themselves… they were the world greatest traders, when the romans turned the Mediterranean into a lake commerce expanded to a level simply not seen today: capital, goods, and people were truly free to flow from one place to another. They didn’t have a market? Please, visit Constantinople, Rome or Marseille, they were huge center of commerce.
An then you dismiss classical science. True, Aristotles didn’t discover relativity but more than two thousands years ago he walked the first steppes: he, Aristarco of Samos, Eratostenes of Cirene, Ptolomey, and dozens more were great scientist. Joseph Heller said that Aristotles had written more science than he had available to research. The greeks and romans weren’t perfect, they relied to much in the deductive method and too little in the inductive one, and so their conclusion were often wrong (besides they didn’t have electronic microscopes). But to dismiss their contribution to human knowledge is simply astounding.
Finally you dismiss their contribution to Art and Literature. And I can’t answer this… I am speechless.
---
### Author:  [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/135 "2009-08-07T15:09:52Z")
> [@Estilicon](#):
>
> Yesterday I answered this very late in the evening and I wasn’t able to convey my sheer shock for reading such an ignorant thing here, in the SMDB.
> As I said before the Greeks, unable to raise enough food and also to expand resorted to commerce in order to be able to feed themselves… they were the world greatest traders, when the romans turned the Mediterranean into a lake commerce expanded to a level simply not seen today: capital, goods, and people were truly free to flow from one place to another. They didn’t have a market? Please, visit Constantinople, Rome or Marseille, they were huge center of commerce.
> An then you dismiss classical science. True, Aristotles didn’t discover relativity but more than two thousands years ago he walked the first steppes: he, Aristarco of Samos, Eratostenes of Cirene, Ptolomey, and dozens more were great scientist. Joseph Heller said that Aristotles had written more science than he had available to research. The greeks and romans weren’t perfect, they relied to much in the deductive method and too little in the inductive one, and so their conclusion were often wrong (besides they didn’t have electronic microscopes). But to dismiss their contribution to human knowledge is simply astounding.
> Finally you dismiss their contribution to Art and Literature. And I can’t answer this… I am speechless.
Have you ever read a post from anyone saying religion contributed nothing, who has anything other than a near perfect ignorance of history?
---
### Author:  [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/136 "2009-08-07T16:05:21Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#):
>
> Under a Christian Fundamentalist pseudo-Theocracy, a government elder could call you a heretic at any time. With no firm standards in place, replaced as they were by attempts to interpret God’s will and holy scripture, how would you prove him wrong? That you might agree with 99.9% of the elder’s views is no protection.
Yeah, it’s a lot like being called “racist” by a leftie.
---
### Author:  [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)
#### Post date: [August 7, 2009, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/137 "2009-08-07T16:28:19Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#):
>
> Yeah, it’s a lot like being called “racist” by a leftie.
Are we killing people for that now or just torturing them? It’s hard for me to keep up.
---
### Author:  [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)
#### Post date: [August 8, 2009, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/138 "2009-08-08T03:50:58Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#):
>
> Yeah, it’s a lot like being called “racist” by a leftie.
I of all people am in no position to discourage SDMB flippancy, but it helps if there’s some actual thought behind it. Is being accused of racism in a liberal society comparable in any way with being on the wrong side of a power struggle in a fundamentalist society?
I’m not sure how you’d define “liberal society” (I note the mswas did not bother to expand of what he thought comprised “the liberal party line”) but for me a fundamentalist society is, roughly, one that is fanatically dedicated to a particular idea to the exclusion of all others. In such a society, the worst possible thing to accuse someone of is lack of faith in that idea. In a theocracy, call someone a heretic. In a communist society, call them a profiteer. In French society in the years immediately following the revolution, call them a monarchist. It doesn’t matter it it’s true or not, because any and all measures to prevent heresy, profiteering and the return of the monarchy are fair game, including executing people who _might_ have thoughts along these lines because the stakes are just that high.
The net result, of course, is that the accusation becomes a useful tool to eliminate one’s political rivals, or even people one perceives as _potential_ political rivals. The somewhat worrisome trend in recent years in American politics is to accuse someone of lack of patriotism. True? False? Does it matter? Further, the people making the accusation most often are either in a religion faction or are closely linked to one. Fox News’ audience may not be demanding the return of the guillotines to satisfy their bloodlust, but they’re quite happy to enrich commentators who can _titillate_ their bloodlust by blaming liberals for anything and everything.
Eternal vigilance is necessary to hold it at this level. When such vigilance is absent, very ugly things begin to happen.
But if you want to equate this with your poor widdle feelings getting hurt by someone calling you a racist, be my guest.
---
### Author:  [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)
#### Post date: [August 9, 2009, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/139 "2009-08-09T12:05:39Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#):
>
> I of all people am in no position to discourage SDMB flippancy, but it helps if there’s some actual thought behind it. Is being accused of racism in a liberal society comparable in any way with being on the wrong side of a power struggle in a fundamentalist society?
>
> I’m not sure how you’d define “liberal society” (I note the mswas did not bother to expand of what he thought comprised “the liberal party line”) but for me a fundamentalist society is, roughly, one that is fanatically dedicated to a particular idea to the exclusion of all others. In such a society, the worst possible thing to accuse someone of is lack of faith in that idea. In a theocracy, call someone a heretic. In a communist society, call them a profiteer. In French society in the years immediately following the revolution, call them a monarchist. It doesn’t matter it it’s true or not, because any and all measures to prevent heresy, profiteering and the return of the monarchy are fair game, including executing people who _might_ have thoughts along these lines because the stakes are just that high.
>
> The net result, of course, is that the accusation becomes a useful tool to eliminate one’s political rivals, or even people one perceives as _potential_ political rivals. The somewhat worrisome trend in recent years in American politics is to accuse someone of lack of patriotism. True? False? Does it matter? Further, the people making the accusation most often are either in a religion faction or are closely linked to one. Fox News’ audience may not be demanding the return of the guillotines to satisfy their bloodlust, but they’re quite happy to enrich commentators who can _titillate_ their bloodlust by blaming liberals for anything and everything.
>
> Eternal vigilance is necessary to hold it at this level. When such vigilance is absent, very ugly things begin to happen.
>
> But if you want to equate this with your poor widdle feelings getting hurt by someone calling you a racist, be my guest.
Thanks for this post Bryan.
Bias is nearly impossible to escape completely but I’m still stunned sometimes by how eagerly and sometimes maliciously people will embrace a lie.
---
### Author:  [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)
#### Post date: [August 10, 2009, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393/140 "2009-08-10T00:04:31Z")
> [@Estilicon](#):
>
> Yesterday I answered this very late in the evening and I wasn’t able to convey my sheer shock for reading such an ignorant thing here, in the SMDB.
> As I said before the Greeks, unable to raise enough food and also to expand resorted to commerce in order to be able to feed themselves… they were the world greatest traders, when the romans turned the Mediterranean into a lake commerce expanded to a level simply not seen today: capital, goods, and people were truly free to flow from one place to another. They didn’t have a market? Please, visit Constantinople, Rome or Marseille, they were huge center of commerce.
You’re nitpicking without taking the ten seconds to determine what I meant.
Yes, there was trade in Ancient Greece, and throughout the world through most of time. For most of that time, and in most of those places, merchants were viewed as a necessary evil but certainly among the lower classes (perhaps not in Greece, I’m not sure.) But a trader simply traded. He wasn’t like a banker, he simply transported items from point A to point B and sold for a markup.
They did have:
1. Brute resource gathering
2. Distribution
3. Selling at a markup
They didn’t have:
1. Banking
2. Significant class mobility
3. Manufacture (and the management hierarchy thereof)
Like I said, there wasn’t a market in which to introduce inventions, raise capital in which to start a company which would mass produce your invention, and distribute it for sale. That last item is there, but none of the former. And even if there had been, there was no point in it as being at the top of the merchant class was considered to be an irrelevant position to reach at the time. One was born a merchant, he didn’t decide to become one for the sake of world domination.
So unless you’re arguing that the modern free market existed previous to modern times, you’re missing the point.
> [@](#):
>
> An then you dismiss classical science. True, Aristotles didn’t discover relativity but more than two thousands years ago he walked the first steppes: he, Aristarco of Samos, Eratostenes of Cirene, Ptolomey, and dozens more were great scientist. Joseph Heller said that Aristotles had written more science than he had available to research. The greeks and romans weren’t perfect, they relied to much in the deductive method and too little in the inductive one, and so their conclusion were often wrong (besides they didn’t have electronic microscopes). But to dismiss their contribution to human knowledge is simply astounding.
> Finally you dismiss their contribution to Art and Literature. And I can’t answer this… I am speechless.
Where did I dismiss either of these? Looking back through my text, I’m quite certain that I don’t see the place where I say, “Man those Greeks sure had sucky art!” That’s almost certainly because I didn’t say it.
You yourself have just said that the Greeks were reliant on deduction. I said nothing more nor less than exactly what you said in this paragraph, and you’re decrying me for it. The only thing I added was a likely explanation for why inductive reasoning didn’t grow.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393.md?page=6)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religion-has-never-bettered-the-world/505393.md?page=8)