Religion Predates Science and Often Ignores It Still

[MineralMan]

During the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age, human beings did not understand even the basic things. For example, at the time the Bible was written, people had some idea, from observation, that both a male and female were required to create a new life. They hadn't a clue about how that worked, however.

"Sperm were first observed in 1677 by Antonie van Leeuwenhoek using a microscope, he described them as being animalcules (little animals), probably due to his belief in preformationism, which thought that each sperm contained a fully formed but small human."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm

Even in 1677, the human or mammalian ovum was not known. The first person to see a sperm cell thought it contained everything needed for the next generation to be created. It wasn't until the 20th century that the human ovum was discovered:

"Karl Ernst von Baer discovered the mammalian ovum in 1827, and Edgar Allen discovered the human ovum in 1928. The fusion of spermatozoa with ova (of a starfish) was observed by Oskar Hertwig in 1876."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_cell

What does this have to do with religion? Well, religion, in general, is pre-scientific. In various scriptures, fanciful descriptions of the origins of things appear, because nobody knew any better. Humans did not understand much of anything about our planet, ourselves, and our universe until science was able to provide more accurate information.

And yet, billions of people still rely on Bronze Age and Early Iron Age documents to understand things. They still follow rules and give credit to ideas that were written before humans understood much of anything about themselves or their surroundings. They still behave as if reproduction is some sort of magical event. People study those ancient writings on a regular basis, but avoid learning the facts.

Such ignorance leads us astray, again and again. Such reliance on the words of people who had very little knowledge with which to work still governs many of us today.

How does that make any sense at all? Why are we stuck in the Iron Age in so many ways? Why do we allow "faith" in old documents to keep us from learning the truth about so many things? Good questions...

[eShirl]

1. it can be a user interface for self-healing abilities... kinda like placebo

(I find it interesting that placebo pills work at the same rate whether you're aware it's fake or not.)

Religions are so much more than that though; they come with lots of extra baggage I don't want.
I stick to meditation and creative visualization.

[MineralMan]

2. The factual errors in religious scriptures, as have been demonstrated

again and again by science, lead to conflicts. Today, it is difficult to read things like the creation myths and not say, "Wait...what?"

Some attempt to gloss over those errors, referring to "metaphors" or whatever. Yet, the same people will introduce writings that attempt to align such myths with demonstrated reality. That leads to some almost comical stretches of credulity.

Humans are creative beings, capable of imagining almost anything. Before science existed, imaginary explanations of many things were created by humans. We are also capable of fooling ourselves into thinking our imaginary explanations are somehow correct. An entire industry has developed to try to do that, and it is still trying to reconcile mythology with reality. Unsuccessfully, of course, but still able to convince many, who do not have basic scientific knowledge, that what they say is true.

Learning and understanding what science has come to understand can be quite difficult, really. That difficulty leads many to simply latch on to the earlier, simpler, mythological explanations. Various hybrid explanations have resulted from this, so we have museum exhibits that show humans walking alongside dinosaurs. And some people believe those exhibits, because, you know, they have seen them.

[edhopper]

6. But, but but...

what about the Y and X chromosomes and the whole rib thing?

[Act_of_Reparation]

7. You obviously know a lot about medicine.

[abqtommy]

3. I'd have to say that in my opinion

science and religion have co-existed from the earliest days of human activity. For instance, one archaeologist stated that in the time frame of 1 million years ago there is some evidence of the controlled use of fire while by the time of 500 thousand years ago the controlled use of fire was a universal achievement for humans. The people who used fire to smelt bronze or brass, or iron or used the kiln in making pottery or producing glass were using science no matter how backward we see their religious concepts. I think that from the beginning religion was developed from superstition but science has always existed in reality and the same distinction applies today.

[Voltaire2]

4. Crafts aren't science.

Perhaps the op should define what he meant, but I think science means something like “the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment”.

[MineralMan]

5. Yes. The standard definition of science.