Is it true that if Christianity never existed, technology would have advanced 1000 years early?

quora.com/What-is-the-most-misunderstood-historical-event/answer/Tim-ONeill-1

While I think they were important in sciences such as medicine and astronomy, I don't think they were instrumental. Why would we need religion to develop medicine when the motivation of saving lives could be a good justification in of itself?

I don't think religion is inherently bad or anything, but I think you're giving it too much credit.

Of course when some illiterate german king combined scholar institutions and libraries with ecclesiasticals they quickly over took everything with their godfaggotry, few chronicles are well kept and most of them are commissioned by kings

Sure. Instead of studying Holy Scripture all of the smart people would study Laws of Nature. I can see how this ends in hundred years of scientific advancement. Then you exclude the most wars that religion started for non-existent so called God. Without harm of crusades and witch burning you can easily end up with another hundreds of a pure scientific progress. It is very simple, and yet very rational idea in its core.

>motivation of saving lives could be a good justification in of itself?

How does the average person become motivated to save lives without religion?

>The last known head of the Department of Mathematics and Philosophy, Musaeum of Alexandria, part of the Library of Alexandria, a female mathematician Hypatia of Alexandria murdered 415 A.D by Christians.

>Many Astronomers were persecuted for their beliefs that the heavens are changing, stars die, and the Earth revolves around the sun.
>In the time of the Black Plague in the 16th century, the very Idea of Vaccinations and Innoculations were shunned and forbidden by the Catholic Church.

>The Spanish Inquisition halted the advancement of technology for they were fanatically conservative, torturing those who had free will and thought.

>Dissection of deceased human bodys was not allowed until the Black Plague reached its peak.

>Medicine in itself was based on Religious Philosophies up until the late 18th century.

...

Literally all of this is incorrect. Read a fucking book.

There are many reason from personal involvement like saying lives of children to more general inborn altruism or even shared history or a sympathy for the victim. Some people just do that as their work and even for money. This is also a good motivation.

This isn't thread about religious people, but about an impact of Christianity. Alchemist was religious but far from classic catholicism, Islam leaded to a Golden Scientific Age and pagan Greeks basically invented science, for example.

> Christianity never existed
> Instead everyone is Mithraist
> or even worse believe in Thor
That would be realistic result and I am sure that it would end even worse for science in the long run.

I dunno dude, ask any doctor who's an atheist.

More like Manichaen tbqh senpai

*tips fedora*

Grow up

I hope every one of you pieces of shit who posts garbage like this die prematurely in some violent, painful accident. Why even post colour-coded data if you're too fucking retarded to actually label what the colours represent?

Seriously, fuck you, you pisscloth. And fuck everyone who does this.

>1000 years of manpower and resources not wasted on building huge Cathedrals, monasteries and Churches
>1000 years of scholars researching actual Science and not bicker who's flavor of Jesus worship is the best
>1000 years of donations and taxes funding that research instead of making pedophiles richer
>1000 years of smart minds not being imprisoned because their findings somehow triggered the Pope or one of his buttbuddies
>1000 years of hundred thousands of people not being burned at the stake because Inquisitors needed an excuse to torture people over superstition, and further emphasising those superstitions over reason
Oh boy I wonder what the answer to this question is.

Who controlled the education on the times of Newton? Who do you think that kept most of the ancient knowledge alive? Who do you think that taught most people how to read and basic knowledge in science for most of the last 1000 years? Who do you think that was in charge of most of the big European years and its formation?The Islamic Golden age and even Greek culture achieved mothing compared to christian Europe. The dark ages is just a meme.

>implying that the society would have switched from Christianity to Atheism
>implying that we wouldn't be living in a caliphate right now

> Who do you think that kept most of the ancient knowledge alive?
Muslim Scientists

Atheism does not mean you're any less Superstitious or that you become a scholar... or that resources aren't "wasted" on architecture or being driven to act based on the whims of a tyrant.

You are also dead wrong in assuming religion hasn't done anything to contribute towards science either.

> implying it would be bad
European Caliphate would turn out pretty okay at the end. It isn't like there was that much difference between two religions in that time anyway.

Pls tell me what Romans achieved in science in 1000 years.Show me a greek or muslim schoolar on Newton's level.

>This meme again.

It's also notable to consider that Islam didn't enforce a change in cultural norms either. Which is why today in the modern world Muslim nations are massively different from one another on a cultural level.

> Aristotle
> The inventor of Science and Logic
> Marcus Aurellius
> The inventor of the Stoicism
Everyone can see apple falling from the tree but you need to be a genius to invent the logic from scratch.

>European Caliphate would turn out pretty okay at the end
Like India did fucktard? Muslims destroyed Persia too,and if it wasnt for the competition between Islam and Christianity the new trade roots and America would have taken way longer to discover. Let me guess,you are a shitskin.

>complains about assumptions
>assumptions which he assumed
Can't make this up.
Nowhere in my post did I claim that.

This is bait right.

>Calculus is less important than Stoicism
This is as fedora as it gets.

You do realize that the scientific method didn't just pop up overnight in some kind of philosophical vacuum? And that if it hadn't been Christianity, it would've been some other faith system that dominated Europe? And that "scientists being locked up by the church" is so flawed and circumstantial that it's basically a meme, right?

Tell me a single Roman schoolar on par with Newton. Protip you cant.

>Everyone can see apple falling from the tree

>he still comes to a board dedicated to discussion of history and humanities
>he participates in discussions of historical matters
>is so fucking historically ignorant he believes a myth that even the most common person with no interest in history knows is a load of rubbish

Kill yourself.

>the scientific method was invented by people who were Christians first and scholars second
They were scholars first and Christian second.
That is like claiming Christianity landed on the Moon and not NASA.

> Muslims destroyed Persia too
You mean Mongols, right?

>total nonsense which misses the point entirely
So no bait, but retardation and desperation.
Got it.

Nope. Muslims killed a superior culture and turning it into a shithole. As they did with Egypt and India. Islam is the cancer of this earth and must be exterminated

> I can't name even one!
> m-m-m-ust be a total nonsense
Point proven.

None of these people, typing these posts, contribute anything to scientific progress today, while the situation is accelerated. I have no clue on what basis they form arguments. Maybe if there was someone, whose argument I gave a shit about, who actually did something for science, was typing here, I'd take it seriously. Not you.

>answer my total brainfart otherwise I am right!!! ;_;
Hilarious, well shitposted user.

I am still waiting for a single Roman scholar on par with Newton. I know that it triggers you Fedoras,but christianity didnt slowed Europe's progress.

see

>Take over scholarly institutions
>We wuz learned

Top kek, everything was invented by pagans, muslims, and post enlightenment thinkers

what does that have to do with the topic you triggered retard?
>inb4 you post this a 4th time

> expecting real scientist to post in a religion sub-forum of Kyrgyz ship modeling forum

Not an argument

Oh please, you're seriously arguing that getting rid of religion would somehow make the world a better place while ignoring a ton of other factors.

Just because a pope doesn't exist doesn't mean cruel monarchies won't exist. Just because people aren't reading the bible doesn't mean more people will become scientists. Just because people aren't "wasting" resources on religious structures does not mean they won't use those resources to build things equally as frivolous.

On what basis do you have to legitimately prove that religion regressed science when many religious people forwarded science throughout many centuries? Hell, Arabia didn't even start practising science to any significant degree (let alone start a golden age) until Islam was introduced and united the region. While any unifying factor outside of religion would have worked in this case, I think it's reasonable to argue that Islam was very beneficial for jump starting the enlightenment of the middle east.

>muslims

Neither is your goalpost moving.

> Rome was most Christian nation at its peak
> Newton was full into into occultism and alchemy
I don't know what are trying to prove here. That Christianity is useless for scientific mind, I guess?

> cruel monarchies won't exist.
Monarchies was always a patrons of science. See the royal science society as example.

>Most education was control by the church
>This education created the greatest scholars in the history of mankind
>WE WOULD BE COLONIZING THE SUN IF IT WASN'T FOR CHRISTIANITY.
>Said the angry fedora,ignoring history as a whole

There are also cultures which had scientific golden ages without basing it on religion, for example Greeks and Ancient Chinese, so you are wrong in assuming it is a requirement for it.

Also
>shit will always be shit so why even try
is not a good view on anything.

Simply; No.

No, see Asia undergoing medieval stasis.
>That is like claiming Christianity landed on the Moon
Hey, it wasn't Nietzsche that they read on the moon;)
But of course, a couple of fedoras got super-butthurt about that at the time.

>nothing but triggered ad hominem meme pics
>taking Church control as a granted requirement and not a byproduct
Stay with ad hominem, rational thought is not your strength.

>Rome was most Christian nation at its peak
This is fake. Rome lasted thousands of years,and for the most part was full pagan. Know tell me a scholar that comes close to Newton's genius. The Roman empire advanced technology as much as Medieval Europe did. But it is just easier to post memes,and praise Rome,whike shitting on christianity because it is edgy

The people on the moon wasn't the one who made the landing possible, anyway.

> Who is Pliny
Stay uneducated fellow Veeky Forumstorian

I never said that. In fact, I argued against that earlier in the thread. My point is that religion hasn't regressed science and in the case of Arabia specifically I'd argue that it actually allowed science to progress. You have to remember, before Islam, Arabia was literally just a scattered tribe of warriors who lived to kill each other every day.

I'm not saying that Islam was required for such progress to happen, but it was the unifying factor that did cause it to happen.

>shit will always be shit so why even try

This wasn't my argument either. What I argued is that removing religion will not keep things from not being shit.

So? A lot of churches were too.

>taking Church control as a granted requirement and not a byproduct
If the church slowed progress,how they were able to develop all the basis of modern science. Newton,Mendel,Lamaitre or Euler were all the product of christian education,while the rest of the world developed little to nothing compared to this people

NASA did not instruct them to read the Bible, it was explicitly stated as an effort of all mankind.
Astronauts of the day were recruited from soldiers, who tend to be religious.
And I don't mind some nice sounding readings in what was their free personal time on route to the mission.

Compared to Newton a literal noone. I guess that you havent study either maths or physiscs to understand the true genius of Newton.

What exactly makes that Christian education?
Nothing about math is Christian, even if it is taught by the most devout zealot who not-masturbates to Jesus every night.
You are putting a tag on something and claim it is a whole.

>The people on the moon wasn't the one who made the landing possible
No, those were Operation Paperclip guys.
And Von Braum was super-religious.

The church/churches controlled the education. And we are discussing mostly if christianity slowed down progress. Bringing christian educated scholars is a valid argument to prove a point.

you are disqualifying yourself and making christians look bad by trying to trigger people with stale /b/ tier meme images instead of using logic.

"I saw no god" first man in space

So your whole point is based on the fact the Church controlled most institutions of basic education, but fail to accept that education is possible without Church control like in countless other times and civilizations?
That's some hefty "correlation does not imply causation" m8.

Gagarin was orthodox.
Khrushchev said that stuff during a press conference, and it got mixed up.

Without christfags, things would be lot different. If the Roman empire was already dying by the time Christfags showed up to ruse them. So the chances of a Roman empire surviving in long run is more unlikely. The german and the saxons might wreck havoc to the entire european area and either usher in era of dark age or if they discover roman roots and like it, they might adopt some culture. Then there's the neighboring Sasanid empire to deal with and the mongols.

Islam might not take root and might not be a future issue.

Saying that stoicism is more important than Calculus is just stupid. Saying that the Church slowed down progress,when it educated the fathers of modern science is just stupid. I am using logic, the others are just answering me with fedora tier logic.

...

No. Education without the church is possible. But modern universities structures was developed by the church. And this is how it is. The church institutionalize knowledge,in a way that really hadnt happen before. You cant claim that universities would have developed the same without the church due lack of data. You could only make assumptions.

Stoicism is not the only Greek accomplishment.
And you keep making that point about "Christian" education, I gave you my counter point in my last post.

>I am using logic, the others are just answering me with fedora tier logic.
>I am right you are wrong nanananananna
You can't be your own judge of logic, unless you are narcissistic and uninterested in debate.

nice straw man and ad hominem
got more meme pics?

This is assuming no other Greek/Roman literature survived aside from within the monasteries. Which if false. The Muslims who inherited the Sasanid/Persian Empire, also got their hands on their library of knowledge.

That's not what I was arguing. I was arguing that "science" as we know it is a very specific, modern thing, and it's absolutely no guarantee that had Christianity not been around we would've somehow magically come to us earlier.

I'm pretty sure this entire post is biased nonsense. I feel like taking it apart like this video, but it's really not worth the effort.

youtube.com/watch?v=_H-a8_BnvAI

>Stoicism is not the only Greek accomplishment.
Of course it is not. I admire greek cukture,but no greek thinker,philosopher of Mathematitian comes close to Newton. The church controlled the education in Europe for over 1000 years,calling it christian education is kind of fair.

Nobody is arguing that the way of history would have went the exact same, after all this is a hypothetical so no side has anything but assumptions and thought experiments.
Using your own argument, you can't claim it would not have went far better without the Church, right?

>Greeks
>scientific golden age

>Chinese
>scientific golden age not arbitrarily coming to end due to pressures that had nothing to do with religion

You're only arguing against yourself, friend

What about Euclid, the guy whose book was studied like for thousands of years?

>Greek mathematics are the basis of what Newton uses
Yes who would have thought things that have to be found earlier are somehow more basic than things that come after them.
Is it also surprising to you that 6th grade math is harder than 5th grade math?
You still have to learn both which makes them equally important.

No,but I am arguing that the church didnt slow down progress,as it was the only institution in Europe that cared about it after the fall of Rome. China didnt develop modern science,and it wasnt christian. The same goes with the rest of the world. If you think thatchristianity slowed down progress,just look at the rest of the world and see how little they contributed too, in the same period of time. Until the last 500 years of history,the progress of science has been pretty slow.

...

...

Sorry I wasn't aware you were the guy who decided what counts as a golden age.
I was wrong in assuming it was scientific census.

Calculus was the biggest leap in maths history since the creation of numbers. If you have taken any physics class you will know this.

Global religion was Christianity - be surprised that there were people that identified them as Christians who committed murders...

WoW m8, what were the odds...

I mean even today criminals that you see on tv are Christian.. do they ever go to church? Of course not..but they were born Christian.