• How about: Which is more susceptible to corruption, Atheism or Religion?
  • Which ever one at that moment had the potential for the most power. In my opinion that usually means religion because whatever else science is, it is usually not used to control people and religion is always used to control people. Hence my belief that religion is most often corrupt(able).
  • There are practically NO religions that haven't been corrupted, one way or another, by the people who find some personal advantage in making pronouncements. Buddhism is perhaps the least corrupted...but virtually every single so-called christian religion will tell you they are the only true one and all others are either misdirected or simply false. Science, mostly, attempts to maintain itself along certain guidelines. Every now and then we get some corruption creeping in, usually when someone seeks personal recognition. Remember cold fusion?
  • Religion. The peer-reviewed aspect of science makes it less susceptible to corruption.
  • The Vatican City bank account could probably buy NASA, through sheer deception alone, but it wouldn't be corrupt, since a miracle would have been involved.
  • Why not ask whether a rock is more susceptible to corruption? There is no reason to corrupt science, it does not yield greater control of the populous. Religion, on the other hand, has been a tool for millennia.
  • Religion, definitely. +5
  • Unlike religion, good science DEPENDS on opening itself up to the scrutiny of peers and having them verify one's findings. If you claim you have made a miraculous discovery of a perpetual motion machine, it is meaningless and nobody will take you seriously if you won't let other scientists examine it and verify it. This is a very effective deterrent to corruption.
  • Neither. Only one's opinion of them.

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy