Is Religion Slowing Down Space Exploration?

finaldeathh · Jul 23, 2006

Lets face it, most people in the US believes in God(in all forms). People are not so much interested in astronomy because they already have a world created for them to learn (ie, the Bible). They don't want to know and they don't care about the amazement of space. The only project people really got excited about was the Moon missions and that was because of pride. I don't think we will go to Mars within the next 50 years because no one wants to waste tax dollars on something that is not important to them. I also don't think that we will make any major stride in space exploration in the near or distant future because most people just don't give a crap about whats out there.

tom_hobbes · Jul 23, 2006

Definitely a subject worthy of a good debate here. There are plenty of religious members of SDC for whom their religion is no bar to space exploration, so it doesn't have to be the case. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

docm · Jul 23, 2006

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />finaldeathh said; Lets face it, most people in the US believes in God(in all forms). People are not so much interested in astronomy because they already have a world created for them to learn (ie, the Bible). They don't want to know and they don't care about the amazement of space.<hr /></blockquote>Your presumption is false from the get-go. If it were correct how do you explain why the Vatican supports astronomy and has its own observatory in Arizona? http://clavius.as.arizona.edu/vo/R1024/VO.html Other Christian faiths either do not discourage exploration or, more often, actively support it as a way to better understand Gods creation. There may be a few flocks that think otherwise, but they're few and far between. As for the Bible; "Great are the works of the Lord; all who research them find pleasure therein (or: all who have pleasure in them want to understand them).'' (Psalm 111:2) People travel to wonder at the height of mountains, at the huge waves of the sea, at the long courses of rivers, at the vast compass of the ocean, at the circular motion of the stars, and they pass themselves by without wondering. (St. Augustine) In terms of Islam look at how many star names are Arabic. They have a long history of great astronomers. etc. etc. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

nexium · Jul 23, 2006

Perhaps 90% of the population has little interest in space exploration. Many of these are liberals. Perhaps 1% are religious enough for religion to be an important factor in their disinterest. Most denominations are space nuetral. We should not blame religion for the small commitment to space exploration. Neil

doubletruncation · Jul 23, 2006

I don't think it can be boiled down quite so simply to say that religion does or does not slow down exploration of the natural world. As docm mentioned the vatican does maintain several observatories, that are in fact very active in the field of astronomy. People may not realize, but the big bang cosmology (with God as the hand that started it all) is the official position of the Catholic Church. Astronomy is one of the oldest sciences in part because ancient religious people undertook systematic observations of the sky to divine the will of the gods. I think it's true that for many people religion can be a motivator to look for what's beyond themselves - people like to study the universe in part because they feel closer to God in doing so. At the same time, I think that when people assume that we know everything because God told us all that's important in the Bible (or Q'uran etc.), that can limit people's curiosity about the universe, and for the reasons you suggested it may make them uninterested in what's out there. In my experience, this can be the case for strict 7-day creationists who scoff when they hear that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, and often see scientists at least (and perhaps science itself) as a threat. But remember, you can't generalize to all of religion based on those people. However, I do think that you can say in general that there is always the issue that religious convictions by their very nature prevent people from being completely open-minded in their investigations, which at least has the potential for hindering science. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

vogon13 · Jul 23, 2006

As a general rule, Luddites and Lysenkoists of any stripe are not a good thing in any culture. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!So many people, so few recipes !!Let's clean up this stinkhole !! </div>

yevaud · Jul 23, 2006

...look at how many star names are Arabic. They have a long history of great astronomers. I would suggest that the more correct descriptive would be "had." They were valuable in their own right, but the connection of scientific respect yesterday = scientific respect today is always a bit stretched. China = respect today because they invented gunpowder? Enough! And, perhaps centuries or what have you from now, we'll be the "has beens." More power to progress. But you can't use the achievements of the past to indicate any current prowess I regret. Just an opinion. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

qso1 · Jul 23, 2006

I don't think religion is the reason. finaldeathh: I don't think we will go to Mars within the next 50 years because no one wants to waste tax dollars on something that is not important to them. Me: As you pointed out, they simply don't care. Most folks, especially younger people do no see a direct benefit from human spaceflight. They see it either as welfare for engineers or just something that has nothing to do with their daily lives. More people know the color of Britney Spears babies eyes, or how many peices of Jewelry 50 Cent has than know the names of most astronauts. And if you really stop and think about it, thats the way its about always been. In the 1960s there were more people interested but only because the government and public schools emphasized the importance of science exploration, as did the media. But even then, I recall in Jr High School being singled out as a "Space nerd". I didn't fit with the in crowd as I'm sure people today don't fit in well if they are interested in space. At the very least, when I have a space related conversation with people...in less than five minutes it goes from cool, to "We should spend the money on people here who need it". I rarely if ever hear of religion playing any sort of role. I've actually known religious folks who are supportive. I would say fundamentalist religions would probably be against it but for now, my read is that religion plays a small role in how human spaceflight is viewed. I agree that we probably won't go to Mars but it could happen if we discover life and have to confirm it 100% or as close to 100% as we can. Or if private enterprise develops the means of reaching low Earth orbit inexpensively. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

silylene old · Jul 24, 2006

It isn't religion per se that "slows down" space exploration. None of the major religions is ant-space exploration. In fact the Vatican even funds a world-class observatory. The problem is deeper. It is the cultural attitude that religion fosters which slows down space exploration. Western religions are faith-based. The long-term viability of religions rely on children being indoctrinated at very early ages by parents and formal religious classes that the concept of faith is a rational and reasonable way to think. The answer to childhood curiousity is "faith", and faith becomes a way of thinking and problem solving, instead of reason and logic and and open-mindedness and further curiousity. In some religions, for example Southern Baptist, science is even openly belittled and the pseudo-science of creationism is taught to replace biology, geology and astronomy. In the US, polls show that more than 60% of the population believe in creationism instead of science, and only about 15% of the population supports the scientific concept of evolution. When the majority of the population allows faith and pseudo-science to dominate the way they think, instead of reason, understanding and scientific method, then space exploration will not get the level of support that it could have had. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center">I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function. </div> </div>

alokmohan · Jul 24, 2006

Prohitively costly Space exploration started as a result of cold war between USA and USSR .In 1957,USSR sent sputnik to space finishing the myth of US spremacy in field of science.It was the first artifial satellite .US was not prepaed the shock from "nation of peasants".Then cane spunik 2 ,failure of American explorer.There was uproar from public.There was a successful explorer 2.In 1961 Gagarin went to space.Prsident Kennedy already worried about fasco in CUBA,made priority programme for going to moon.And the thing started.I have not heard of religi0n playing negative role in matter of space exploration.

Swampcat · Jul 24, 2006

"...faith becomes a way of thinking and problem solving, instead of reason and logic and and open-mindedness and further curiousity." Well said. I couldn't agree more. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> ------------------------------------------------------------------- "I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."Thomas Jefferson </div>

bdewoody · Jul 24, 2006

I believe that lack of percieved business opportunities and our not reaching an untolerable population crunch are the reasons for our (the USA) slow progress getting off this planet. On the other hand countries like Japan, China and India see opportunities in space and on other planets (moons) for easing their "space" crunch. Too many people think the money spent on our space program is wasted and should be spent on social problems here at home. Although I'm sure that if NASA's budget got cut not one cent of the savings would be transferred to a social program. I guess they forget that ALL the money spent on the space program stays here on earth and is mostly spent paying salaries to people who do jobs and in turn buy houses, clothes, vehicles, food etc. To hear some people talk you would think that NASA bundles up 2 or 3 billion dollars and launches it into space every time either the shuttle or a new probe is launched. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Bob DeWoody </div>

mikeemmert · Jul 24, 2006

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Perhaps 90% of the population has little interest in space exploration. Many of these are liberals.<img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /><hr /></blockquote> <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> Take it to Free Space.

MeteorWayne · Jul 24, 2006

I am a liberal on some issues, a conservative on others, and a libertarian on most. I object to your broad brush insinuation because I use my brain for thinking I am against the space program It is just the opposite. In fact the fundamentalist approach to religion would be more closely aligned with neo-conservatism, so let's leave the political labels out of the argument or move it to free space <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

JonClarke · Jul 24, 2006

There are a number of fundamental problems with that analysis. Starting with the assumption that faith and reason are in conflict, then linking faith with pseudocience and ending with the assertion that space exploration will not get the level of funding it could have if religious views continue to dominate. The first is incorrect, the second does not follow, and the third is historically incorrect given the fact that the great age of exploration was also one of much stronger public avowal of reglious belief. The interaction various religious beliefs, science, and technology is complex and fascinating. It cannot be broken down into simplistic assetions like"religion bad, science good" or "science bad, religion good" etc. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 24, 2006

alokhoman, I grew up during this era, and cannot describe the excitement that the exploration of space. While the politics of the time were relevant as far as the expenditure of money was concerned (and while it was a lot, we did not have trillion dollar deficits to deal with, so prohibitive is not the right word) , the real goal was the exploration of space for those of us who were young at the time. It's all about the knowledge, and to me that continues even today. MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 24, 2006

Well put, Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Swampcat · Jul 24, 2006

"The interaction various religious beliefs, science, and technology is complex and fascinating. It cannot be broken down into simplistic assetions like"religion bad, science good" or "science bad, religion good" etc." Jon, of course it can be broken down in such simplistic terms. Maybe things are different in Oz, but in the US there is indeed a very large number of people who use religion to attack science and equate it with evil. That's not a knock on religion in general because as you said the interaction between religious beliefs and science is complex and not all who claim to be religious are in denial of science. Unfortunately, a good many are and it's a fair analysis to say that this anti-science stance is not good for space exploration. There is a basic conflict between faith and reason. It's in the nature of the two concepts to be in conflict. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. The problem arises when faith rejects reason. This is most often the case with fundamentalist religions and there are a lot of fundamentalists. They see things in simple good and evil terms. It's the way it is. Not very complex at all. "...historically incorrect given the fact that the great age of exploration was also one of much stronger public avowal of reglious belief." There were natives to convert. I guarantee that if there were sapient life forms on Mars the fundamentalists would be taking up offerings to buy spacecraft to get their missionaries there, tout de suite. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> ------------------------------------------------------------------- "I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."Thomas Jefferson </div>

kmarinas86 · Jul 24, 2006

Space exploration needs money, success, enterprise, LOW COST, and extra baggage, before people become interested again. Heck, Concorde was mainstream, went twice the speed of sound, 60,000 feet (1/6th as high as Spaceship One). Get them interested in hypersonic flight. The next step is to get them interested in space travel. Religion makes little contribution to the rate of solving (Space Exploration/World Hunger). It is ECONOMICS which needs to be solved, because the most powerful way of changing a culture is via economics. If you want to be really interested in space, you must go there (your interest will soar when you make that trip, even if you are already crazy about going there). There's no better way of enjoying your favorite place than actually being there, because you must have something you can socialize about (such as your experience being there) or else its just not dinner table material!

qso1 · Jul 25, 2006

crazyeddie: Even though I grew up in the 1960's, the Apollo program was pretty much over by the time I got to high school.... Me: Thats about how it was with me. Being dubbed space cadet had a direct relationship on how many dates I lost. crazyeddie: when did our lives become so shallow? Me: I think they always were to some extent. When spaceflight becomes as familiar and entrenched as going to Paris on a 747. There will be the small few who made it happen, the larger percentage who watched it happen. And in that bunch will be those who will be talking about whos bopping who in Hollywood as they cruise on their vacation to Mars...at least thats my hope. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

maxkitty · Jul 25, 2006

man has always been shallow, we've just found new things to be shallow about. as for religion slowing down space exploration...i think the ways our schools are run and their cirriculum (spl???) have a MUCH larger impact then religion. i graduated a little less then two years ago from high school and i can tell you that anything to do with space, space exploration, planets, etc. is barely taught, if it's taught at all. the only thing i was ever taught about space was that space was a vacuum (and they didn't even explain to us what that meant) and had us memorise the order of the planets. that's it! everything i know about anything outside our planet i learned from the discovery channel and the science channel (both of which, i am very dissapointed to say, hardly ever have programs on about space, etc. anymore. all their shows are about cars, buildings, and survivorman!). in other words, the lack of interest doesn't come from religion, it comes from lack of exposure (spl??? sorry, i never was good at spl <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ) hope that makes sense.

CalliArcale · Jul 25, 2006

My two cents: I don't think religion is slowing down space exploration in general. It's apathy that's doing it. And the people who are apathetic about space are usually apathetic about religion too. There are exceptions. Those with religious objections to space travel are usually fanatics, generally written off by the average public anyway. But they're in a very small, albeit vocal, minority. There are also those who are specifically against space travel but for secular reasons, usually with good intentions -- how can we spend billions on space travel when people are starving to death practically in our own back yard? But generally, I think the main impediment is apathy. Most people don't really know what they're missing as far as exploration goes. And I don't think that's anything new. I suspect that the average person in Europe in 1500 had very little interest in the exploration of the New World and the South Pacific and similar places. To most people, they were exotic locales suitable for fantastical stories and little more. That's much how people today seem to react to spaceflight. I suspect it's not something that can be fixed; if it's been with us that long, it's probably fundamental to human nature. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

5stone10 · Jul 25, 2006

I haven't witnessed a measurable current correlation - although the conflict between science [ie., space exploration] and religion is obvious.

toothferry · Jul 26, 2006

another 2cents from me.. To find out why people aren't interested in space you first have to find out why the people that are interested in space are interested. Why do we want to send rockets away from Earth and explore the unknown, or don't we already know what's out there? And why do we care what's out there? What's with prying into the very beginnings of the universe with great telescopes all about? ..and why split atoms with particle collider? Why are we trying to understand the physics of our universe ..and of the subatomic one? What are we trying to find out? We are trying to prove something or discover something? And why do we need those facts, or isn't faith in what we already know good enough for us? Humankind's curiosity is kindled by not knowing what's going on and wanting to find out. If someone thinks they already know behind a closed door they don't care about prying it open. There is never a need to search for the answers of something that we think we already know.

JonClarke · Jul 27, 2006

"the conflict between science [ie., space exploration] and religion is obvious." The "conflict thesis" persists in the popular mind but has been completely rejected by virtually all philosophers and historians of science as useful representation of the relationship between the two. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

Is Religion Slowing Down Space Exploration?

finaldeathh

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

docm

Guest

nexium

Guest

doubletruncation

Guest

vogon13

Guest

yevaud

Guest

qso1

Guest

silylene old

Guest

alokmohan

Guest

Swampcat

Guest

bdewoody

Guest

mikeemmert

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Swampcat

Guest

kmarinas86

Guest

qso1

Guest

maxkitty

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

5stone10

Guest

toothferry

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page