Take-out menus?
I bet I’m gonna get flamed for that one.
—What MIGHT have happened(in place of religion) is a pointless debate that can add nothing to any logical discussion.—
Isn’t that EXACTLY what I began this discussion by saying?
However, you HAVE been making the argument that things would have been worse without it, which IS a discussion of “might.” As I stated, I think that is just as unjustifiable (at least without some serious argument of a form you’ve not yet attempted) as claiming that things would be better.
Right. I think we’re all in agreement on this now. Which probably will mean the death of this thread.
Yes, you did say this.
I ask you what you think Is worse? I never said (or that I remember anyhow, without going through the thread) that I thought it would be worse. If I did say that, please do point this out to me. I said many times that we owe (philosophically, scientifically and ethically) much (though I overstated it, and I admited that) to religion. I stated the church as the prime example.
So what are you trying to debate here? What might have happened? Have you read my posts? I stated very specifically that better or worse did NOT matter, only that we would not be where we are. Are you wanting to build up fantasy lands and do some worldbuilding trying to figure out what the world would be like without religion, is that the debate you are looking for? I really don’t understand what you are looking for.
and blowero made me see that this was a bit of a redunant statement, but here it is anyhow.
Are you wanting to debate what “might” have happened? Are you sure you want to get that nitty gritty into history to debate this?
—I stated very specifically that better or worse did NOT matter, only that we would not be where we are.—
Which, as you seem to realize, then forget long enough to bring it back up to criticize, then realize again and forget that it invalidates your criticism, is a pretty meaningless triviality. We would not “be where we are” without the Holocaust either. Or the invention of horseshoes. So what?
—Are you wanting to debate what “might” have happened?—
If the the claims like “without X, we would not be where we are” or “without X, Y would never have happened” are to have ANY useful meaning in a discussion, we cannot avoid but debate what “might” have happened without it. And no, I did NOT really want to debate those things, as I stated, because I don’t think there’s any good basis on which to discuss them.
True enough.
I merely stated a truism, I am not sure how the debate got jumbled up as it did. Certainly it had to do with my poor debating skills. Ah well, I learned alot, and was entertained, which is certainly the point of these debates, right?