|
Week 1
Jun 28, 2015 17:20:59 GMT
Post by Hansen Young on Jun 28, 2015 17:20:59 GMT
1. Why was Socrates sentenced to death? Socrates was sentenced to death because he was accused of a variety of "impious acts". His accusers cited him with not strictly conforming his views with to the gods acknowledged by the city, of creating new gods, and of corrupting the youth with his teachings. The "jurors" selected for his trial agreed with his accusers and handed down the hemlock death sentence. Socrates himself did not strongly defend himself at his own trial, preferring to stand upon the merits of his own integrity and innocence (How Socrates Died, 2). Sadly, in courts of law, people tend to need supporting proof/evidence before they believe people, especially defendents. What led to Socrates' trial and death can be described to be his philosophical views, as well as the accompanying inquisitiveness. Even in the present day, questioning and seeking justification for various aspects of religion can get one in trouble. Probing religion and pointing out logic errors in religion would not have ingratiated Socrates with the religious leaders and other pious power-holders of his time. Rival less-esteemed philosophers would also have motive to bump off the competition. As always, influential people usally end up with other influential enemies. Afterwards all that it takes is to find some charges that are most likely to stick and levy them against your target.
2. Why is there a conflict (for some) between science and religion?
Filling this out later.
|
|
|
Week 1
Jun 28, 2015 17:45:01 GMT
Post by Hansen Young on Jun 28, 2015 17:45:01 GMT
Wow, no editting former posts if you're posting as a guest I suppose.
2. Why is there a conflict (for some) between science and religion?
There are many reasons for why some have issues reconciling science with religion. Science is the act of testing, studying, and questioning in order to try and figure out explanations for why things are the way they are. Religion on the other hand tends to have established dogma based on ancient texts stating why things are they way they are (usually "gods/God etc.)and any challenges to that perspective are seen as attacks on the religion. One can also say that for some, fear of mortality is what drives them to religion, and that science's efforts intrude on their safe space.
Presently, those that tend to use more scientific approaches also tend to be more secular. For the religious, the connotations associated with science itself tend to convoy anti-religious vibes. That is another reason why certain people find conflict between science and religion, even IF the pope himself has said that science is totally reconcilable with the Catholic religion. It's this conflict between science and religion that has resulted in some very laughable campaigns against crticial thinking and rational thought.
Happily, when it comes to the fruits of technology resulting from science, the religious tend to have no qualms as long as they don't think about it too hard. Who'd seriously complain about the convenience of electricity, motorized transportation, life-saving medications, and other scientific advances in such a way as to deny themselves of those benefits in order to conform with religion? Not most people anyway.
|
|