The author does not explain the basis of the statement that his made-up religion would be better than existing religions. Is he asserting that his made-up religion would be more pristine than those that have come down through history merely because of its newness? And why does he find flaw with religions' lack of basis in fact if, in the end, they improve life for their adherents? Religion is not about facts; it's about the end results of the myths and rituals it sustains. We live in a world of myth, despite modern fantasies about science explaining the universe and all its mysteries; religion is but a part of the world of myth and of "good enough" explanations for unknown (and perhaps unknowable) mysteries. I'm not claiming vile acts have not taken place in the name of religion; I'm claiming that the good acts religion impels outnumber those, and because the facts of life after death and other matters typically left to religion are unknowable, the factual basis of any religion is irrelevant.
Giving our solar system a "slap in the face"
- A stream of galactic debris is hurtling at us, pulling dark matter along with it
- It's traveling so quickly it's been described as a hurricane of dark matter
- Scientists are excited to set their particle detectors at the onslffaught
Once again, our circadian rhythm points the way.
- Seven individuals were locked inside a windowless, internetless room for 37 days.
- While at rest, they burned 130 more calories at 5 p.m. than at 5 a.m.
- Morning time again shown not to be the best time to eat.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.