How long do you think it will be before technology replaces religion?

How long do you think it will be before technology replaces religion?

Attached: 1522726118935.jpg (500x381, 98K)

Other urls found in this thread:

systemspace.link
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

It already has. That's why we have SCIENCETOLOGY.

Religion will integrate technology. Ask the poos about their history

Technology inherently replaces religion.

It has already happened

Attached: 1509093053770.jpg (640x427, 147K)

load of shit.
technogly is nowhere near what Christianity is or could be because it can't move into the metaphysical world its nothing more than a fancy tool is that technogly is as a whole.

But then again none of you have IQ's anywhere near mine so...
go back to sleep and stay ignorant.

already done. systemspace.link
let's all love lain

They did that already during the late XIXth, that time was called "La Belle Epoque" (The Beautiful Era). Basicly spawning from the end of the Franco-Prussian war of 1870 to the start WWI. People had a casi-religious faith in technical progress... As you can see from the dates alone it didn't end well, and then blind belief in racial "science" gave us WWII.


You can't trust technical progress and science because humans are too retarded to understand their own creations. For instance my trust in the internet spawned from 1993 to 2008/2010 now I don't believe in the Internet anymore and I lost all hope I had in it.

>christianity
cringe and bluepilled

>when will facts replace fiction
Sorry, denial is part of the human experience

>But then again none of you have IQ's anywhere near mine so...
Exactly. Come back when you join the tripple digit IQ club

70 years previous

Why would it?

>bragging about 10x IQs
>not knowing that's still brainlet levels

kek

The glory of templeOS will be upon the world.

>all these wedditers under the delusion that science and technology have debunked religion

Attached: muh dawkins.png (1277x482, 62K)

We definitely need to find a way to maintain philosophers.

>facts
A very, VERY broad term.

scaince it religion of technology

Science isn't a religion of technology.

Philosophy of science covers thought experiments such as the brain in the vat and the allegory of the cave.

Alot of precepts posited in the matrix are deemed real with regard to our brains being a source of energy with our bodies in sensory isolated pods in fact alot of studies are currently done in the field of artificial intelligence on neural networks, like dissecting the brain of a rat, I think Einstein said if rats were the size of dogs they would overrun and rule the world

to non-scientists science is a religion of authority

>>when will replace

lmftfy

Technology and religion deal with completely different subjects, how is one supposed to replace the other?

Weighting perceived value of those subjects.

I remember pricking my finger for blood and having the whole class look at my blood cells in microscopes in biology class so how is that an authority, just simple empiricist pragmatism, or some call that I'll see it to believe it, so how is that an authority, just fundamentals are you positing a world without science of anarcho spirituality which is just disinfo for the greater agenda one would say the conditions of our biological nature condemn us to be biologically conditioned so logically that's not an authority

>in biology class
That's the issue. People actually doingscience is fine, not enough people do or know how to practice scientific methodology or even critical thought.

Atheists are a decreasing share of the global population. It will cease to exist within a few decades after sharia becomes the law in Europe.

>Atheists are a decreasing share of the global population
[citation needed]

To 13 year old redditers,
>religion = the devil
>science and technology = god

It's like complex numbers: there's a real and an imaginary part, but they're still inter-related.

>so how is that an authority, just simple empiricist pragmatism, or some call that I'll see it to believe it

So you independently verify everything you learn?

Burning bushes are technology, user.

it already has. Religion used to be the heart of philosophical endeavors and industry was centered around religion, for example bridges and buildings were constructed by the church. Now technology and algorithms, specifically the free market economy, tell us what to build and where, not the church. And you have technological demagogues like Elon Musk who use twitter to appeal to individual's technological goals with promises like "we will go to mars" or "we will replace the traditional energy industry" using technology as a pretense.

Never, religion gave us technology.

Attached: 1537137505166.jpg (480x480, 47K)

(You)

also technology and spirituality have nothing in common, so even a spirituality derived from tech would not be tech but a spirituality

>racial "science"
Imagine being this much of a leftist

Here's the problem.

1.)Science is a protocol into answering questions of a particular problem. "What's the best mixture of malt and flour for good bread?" Sometimes that question is to figure out more or less how fire behaves.

2.) The narrative from an agnostic/athiest point of view is religion is about answer things we don't know or understand. But see that's invalid because first it was meant to be a guideline on how to be a good person and how there's a spiritual world we cannot see.

Aside from that, wasn't it only about 50 years ago that you would lose tenure if you claimed the universe began at some point?

There's no logical conclusion with science that proves that God or the spritual doesn't exist.

Religion?
What's this? Explain it to someone like me, from the year 2018.

Mainly in terms of ethics and use.