Submitted by BasketCase0024 t3_y8sp94 in philosophy
memoryballhs t1_it3nzx8 wrote
Reply to comment by dmarchall491 in [Peter Harrison] Why religion is not going away and science will not destroy it by BasketCase0024
No. Science inherently can't give answers to questions on "what to do" It's not an answer machine. It just helps in fact seeking .
>High risk of child death tends to lead to more children, not less.
That's just a correlation, nothing more. Even trying to prove a direct causation is super difficult. Kant's objections against the vaccines were pretty en vouge at the time. And most importantly scientifically "correct". Whatever that means.
Law systems are not based on science. law systems are based on morale systems. Nothing in nature implies that the rule "do not kill" is inherent. It just makes morally sense.
You can build with scientific facts whatever death cult you want for example. First rule is to kill as much humans as possible. Try to use as much technology, organization and empirical evidence on how to kill a human as fast as possible and as many as possible. And so on. Oh wait. That's exactly what happened already in Germany 1940
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments