# What if we did something different on Sunday morning? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 4, 2014, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490 "2014-02-04T14:49:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/281 "2014-02-11T03:58:30Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Son of a _bitch_, could you be any more condescending? …apparently so. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/282 "2014-02-11T04:14:34Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > You fail to notice the difference between hijack and “hijack”. > A hijack is what you aptly described. > A “hijack” is when the poster is losing and wants to get out and not lose face, claiming a hijack. > Hence, my stating of a “hijack”. And _you_ somehow fail to mention that I offered to _join_ you in a new thread on the topic-A failure that doesn’t shock me in the least. > [@Human Action](#): > > I have no problem with this. There are a few atheists who insist they have no beliefs whatsoever, including some on this board, but I’m not one of them. I consider that stance nonsensical. As do I. I would like to think that any beliefs I have, however, are based on past experience and do not sink to the level of blind faith. Any belief I have is subject to change pending further evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/283 "2014-02-11T04:34:44Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > And _you_ somehow fail to mention that I offered to _join_ you in a new thread on the topic-A failure that doesn’t shock me in the least. You keep coming back. Like a moth to a flame, haven’t you been burnt enough? I also failed to mention that Lake Victoria is full of water. You somehow failed to mention that I couldn’t give fewer fucks about your offer without Riemann’s ghost affecting my REM time. Or is this another “hijack” which you will promptly inform us your desire to disengage from? (yeah, I end sentences with preposition, that’s how metal I am) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/284 "2014-02-11T04:47:10Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Sure. We pay taxes for our “secular social network” as well. We all have to pay taxes, but about 40% of Americans take the voluntary strings of church attendance. > > Czarcasm, I am not trying to argue church is some sort of fun adventure. It was merely a little side conversation about _if_ it was fun. If it _was_ fun, during Sunday service, then this would be a different conversation with (perhaps) different conclusions. But having been to quite a few different services from quite a few different religions/sects, the word “fun” isn’t how I would describe the vast majority of them-thus, I don’t think that it serves as a major reason to come to church rather than stay at home, whether you spend that part of the day in scientific exploration or not. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/285 "2014-02-11T13:16:54Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Sure. We pay taxes for our “secular social network” as well. We all have to pay taxes, but about 40% of Americans take the voluntary strings of church attendance. Because most of them derive some sort of personal satisfaction and benefit from doing so, and nobody is aguing that. What the OP suggests, however, is that the world would be a better place if that time was spent learning about and contributing to science. Our friend, **Ají de Gallina** , claims that the OP implies that non-believers are already doing so with their church time and tithe. I don’t see where the OP makes that claim. **Ají de Gallina** appears to be taking issue with an argument he himself manufactured. Now, would the entire world population benefit from a little “sunday science time”? I believe so. Is it fair to single out just the church goers? Perhaps not. ---
**Author:** ![BrianJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/54ee81/32.png) [@BrianJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrianJ)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/286 "2014-02-11T14:16:21Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > And _you_ somehow fail to mention that I offered to _join_ you in a new thread on the topic-A failure that doesn’t shock me in the least. Never play chess with a pigeon. no matter how good you are at Chess, the Pigeon will knock the pieces over, crap all over the board and strut around like it’s victorious. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/287 "2014-02-11T15:04:49Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Now, would the entire world population benefit from a little “sunday science time”? I believe so. Is it fair to single out just the church goers? Perhaps not. This, I agree with. ---
**Author:** ![WheatCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/258eb7/32.png) [@WheatCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WheatCat)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/288 "2014-02-11T15:46:51Z")
Can anyone think of a great scientist before Darwin who was a skeptic? And here are three who took holy orders: Copernicus (Bishop) Mendel (Abbott) George Lemaitre (Priest) On the other hand, it is fair to reply that Copernicus and Mendel at least might have made even more contributions if they had not had to devote so much time to their religious duties, and it is fair to observe that for others, such as Newton, religion was a tremendous diversion from science and math (Newton was secretly anti-Trinitarian and went so far as to teach himself Hebrew in the course of extensive theological study). It therefore seem reasonable to take the position that the pace of modern scientific discovery would probably have been faster without various religious impediments. How much faster strikes me as difficult to pin down. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/289 "2014-02-11T16:00:25Z")
> [@WheatCat](#): > > It therefore seem reasonable to take the position that the pace of modern scientific discovery would probably have been faster without various religious impediments. How much faster strikes me as difficult to pin down. Back then, sure. But now? Can anyone make the compelling argument that religion is holding back scientific progress? ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/290 "2014-02-11T16:07:58Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Back then, sure. But now? Can anyone make the compelling argument that religion is holding back scientific progress? Stem cell research? ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/291 "2014-02-11T16:16:37Z")
It may be holding back progress in some countries, but that doesn’t mean it’s holding back progress for the globe as a whole, right? [http://www.eurostemcell.org/stem-cell-regulations](http://www.eurostemcell.org/stem-cell-regulations) [http://www.mbbnet.umn.edu/scmap.html](http://www.mbbnet.umn.edu/scmap.html) [http://www.mbbnet.umn.edu/scmap/scresearchmap.html](http://www.mbbnet.umn.edu/scmap/scresearchmap.html) > **[Appendix E - Overview of International Human Embryonic Stem Cell Laws](https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/appendix-e-overview-of-international-human-embryonic-stem-cell-laws)** > > Since its founding, The New Atlantis has paid close attention to the ethical and political controversies arising from biotechnology — including especially the heated debates over stem cell research. We are pleased to devote the entirety of our Winter... Note that many countries have laws far stricter than the US. Germany, for one. ---
**Author:** ![WheatCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/258eb7/32.png) [@WheatCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WheatCat)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/292 "2014-02-11T16:19:11Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Back then, sure. But now? Can anyone make the compelling argument that religion is holding back scientific progress? I meant in my first sentence to draw a before-Darwin after-Darwin distinction. I doubt modern scientists have suffered much loss of productivity due to their own personal religious convictions. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/293 "2014-02-11T16:27:05Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > Stem cell research? I think the science part of it is moving right along. No? There’s a timeline at the bottom of [this article](http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/05/health/stem-cells-fast-facts/) that summarizes the progress (accurately, I hope). Though I do acknowledge, as a matter of public policy, religion has been a hindrance in this case. At least in the US. Progress in research seems to have continued despite it. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/294 "2014-02-11T18:39:51Z")
> [@WheatCat](#): > > Can anyone think of a great scientist before Darwin who was a skeptic? And here are three who took holy orders: > > Copernicus (Bishop) > Mendel (Abbott) > George Lemaitre (Priest) > > On the other hand, it is fair to reply that Copernicus and Mendel at least might have made even more contributions if they had not had to devote so much time to their religious duties, and it is fair to observe that for others, such as Newton, religion was a tremendous diversion from science and math (Newton was secretly anti-Trinitarian and went so far as to teach himself Hebrew in the course of extensive theological study). > > It therefore seem reasonable to take the position that the pace of modern scientific discovery would probably have been faster without various religious impediments. How much faster strikes me as difficult to pin down. But, in the case of Mendel for example, it’s safer to say the if he hadn’t had all the time to observe the colours of bean plants due to his religious duties he wouldn’t have had the chance of noticing stuff Of course, being a priest may not be the ideal day job for unravelling string theory in your free time. Newton, great guy that he was, could’ve laid down alchemy a bit. Many priest/scientists, even if I’m contradicting myself a bit, find that the lack f “wordly” cares frees the mind for deeper studies. > [@QuickSilver](#): > > Back then, sure. But now? Can anyone make the compelling argument that religion is holding back scientific progress? > [@kayaker](#): > > Stem cell research? > [@QuickSilver](#): > > I think the science part of it is moving right along. No? > > There’s a timeline at the bottom of [this article](http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/05/health/stem-cells-fast-facts/) that summarizes the progress (accurately, I hope). Though I do acknowledge, as a matter of public policy, religion has been a hindrance in this case. At least in the US. Progress in research seems to have continued despite it. Many christians object to using fetal cell from aborted fetuses. I know of no christians who object to stem cell research per se. Adult stem cell research is progressin abundantly and it’s sure to ar least equal if not surpass aborted-fetus stem cell Heck, even sweat glands are now being use for stem cells. > [@QuickSilver](#): > > Because most of them derive some sort of personal satisfaction and benefit from doing so, and nobody is aguing that. What the OP suggests, however, is that the world would be a better place if that time was spent learning about and contributing to science. Isn’t it a bit “excluded middle” stuff, like there is no other choice. > [@](#): > > Our friend, **Ají de Gallina** , claims that the OP implies that non-believers are already doing so with their church time and tithe. I don’t see where the OP makes that claim. **Ají de Gallina** appears to be taking issue with an argument he himself manufactured. If the OP says “stop going to church, study science” and “stop tithing, give money to science” isn’t it the logical conclusion that it means “non-churchgoers study science on Sunday and give money to science?”. Because, if not, it’s like he’s singling out chruchgoers for no reason other than not liking religion. [/QUOTE] Now, would the entire world population benefit from a little “sunday science time”? I believe so. Is it fair to single out just the church goers? Perhaps not. [/QUOTE] Agreed on both counts. That’s my take on the OP. ---
**Author:** ![WheatCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/258eb7/32.png) [@WheatCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WheatCat)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/295 "2014-02-11T22:09:17Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > But, in the case of Mendel for example, it’s safer to say the if he hadn’t had all the time to observe the colours of bean plants due to his religious duties he wouldn’t have had the chance of noticing stuff If you mean he had more spare time than he would have had in a non-academic secular profession I do not see why that should be so. It does occur to me, though, that Mendel made his great discoveries before he was appointed Abbot, and it was only after then that he had to discontinue scientific work. I also seem to recall that Mendel’s student application for scientific study was rejected, so the secular realm may be said to have in Mendel’s case to have done more to get in the way of progress than the religious realm. > [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Of course, being a priest may not be the ideal day job for unravelling string theory in your free time. I think the Jesuits allow their members to pursue full-time academic careers; LeMaitre was a Jesuit. > [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Newton, great guy that he was, could’ve laid down alchemy a bit. Newton may have devoted more time to both alchemy and theology than to math and science. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2014, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/296 "2014-02-12T01:09:15Z")
> [@WheatCat](#): > > If you mean he had more spare time than he would have had in a non-academic secular profession I do not see why that should be so. > > It does occur to me, though, that Mendel made his great discoveries before he was appointed Abbot, and it was only after then that he had to discontinue scientific work. I also seem to recall that Mendel’s student application for scientific study was rejected, so the secular realm may be said to have in Mendel’s case to have done more to get in the way of progress than the religious realm. If all he had wanted was to study science, then I agree that being a priest took time away (of course 99% of scientists do not go on to be renowned for anything) from experiments. Of course, the non-priest Mendel may have done other stuff and no peas. His famous pea experiments, were done in the abbey. He was a highschool teacher, also a profession with little extra time. We could get, in a reduction ad absurdum kind of way, that anything that takes time away from a scientist’s time is detrimental to science (like Sheldon Cooper’s “Science demands nothing less than the fervent and unconditional dedication of our entire lives.”) Darwin thought Mendel was wrong. > [@](#): > > I think the Jesuits allow their members to pursue full-time academic careers; LeMaitre was a Jesuit. The dean of Peru’s most important Economics school is a Jesuit > [@](#): > > Newton may have devoted more time to both alchemy and theology than to math and science. Of course, his non-boning lifestyle gave him some extra hours. ---
**Author:** ![WheatCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/258eb7/32.png) [@WheatCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WheatCat)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2014, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490/297 "2014-02-12T02:02:02Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Darwin thought Mendel was wrong. Double check this- Mendel published his work in an obscure minor journal, and it was overlooked by the scientific profession until well after both he and Darwin were dead. Darwin might have objected to someone else’s ideas, though. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-we-did-something-different-on-sunday-morning/680490.md?page=14)