[MD] Religion is subordinate to science

[Squonkonguitar at aol.com]

Matt:
I like this answer because I think the question is extremely  bad.
 
Mark:
Extremely bad question: "Please address the absence of Intellectual  patterns 
in religion Kevin."

Matt:
As for why the question is bad, there are two simple  responses.
 
Mark:
One: It's not a question but an invitation to give an opinion?
 
Matt:
One, if you define religion as a set of social static patterns, then of  
course there are no intellectual patterns.
 
Mark:
Definition of social patterns: Social patterns are learned through  imitation.
e.g. Father teaches Son Earth is flat. Son imitates father's  assertion Earth 
is flat. (Son may even believe it until doubt is  supplied).
Definition of Intellectual patterns: Intellectual patterns exhibit laws of  
thier own and are deduced from postulation.
e.g. Father teaches Son Earth is flat. Son deduces from two noonday  vertical 
shadows that shadows display congruance with solid geometry.  Conclusion: 
Earth may be sphere.
 
Matt:
Two, if we focus on "religious people", then of course they have  
intellectual patterns of value because no person doesn't.
 
Mark:
This assertion simply requires one example of a religious person with no  
intellectual values to be refuted.
 
Matt: 
If you should argue that none of those patterns traced to  religion are 
specifically _intellectual_, I would beg to differ.
 
Mark:
I'm not making such an argument.
 
Matt:
It seems to me that religion produces just as many "independantly  
manipulable symbols" as 
anything else.
 
Mark:
Conclusion: Quantumn physics is no more manipulatively symbolic than the  
Bible.

Matt

Mark:
In the time i've been away from the MD your IQ appears to have dropped  
considerably.
Quite a remarkable achievment.