Who needs religion, any way?

In the second part of Dawkins’ argument, he claims that in disputes, religion always trumps other ideas, because it assumes a sort of sacredness. I find it odd that he treats religion as just another opinion, such as a man thinking “‘his wife is beautiful and his children smart.’” Dawkins seems to disregard the importance religion plays in developing a complete view of the world around us. Near the end of his argument he finally asks:

What is so special about religion that we grant it such uniquely privileged respect?

Hmm… Perhaps it is because religions have an inconceivable tendency of instruction in morals and ethics. Or maybe it is because religion offers answers to the most important questions about things such as life and death. Or maybe—and I know this is stretching the imagination—it is because religion offers meaning and a purpose to life. I don’t know really… I guess it is rather silly that we give religion any importance, after all.

All sarcasm aside, I truly find it disturbing that Dawkins and others put so little value on religion, and think it can be so easily replaced with other things, such as science. I started thinking about this while I was watching Expelled and the interviews with all of the scientists, but particularly Dawkins. The argument was centered on the seeming conflict between science and religion. However, I’m not so sure this is how the issue should be argued, because religion and science are two completely different things. Science can offer answers about the natural world around us and even about our bodies and ourselves, but it cannot tell us why we are here, if there is good and evil, or tell us what “the meaning of life” is. These are questions that every human being struggles with, and needs answers to. While science can, of course, validate religious beliefs, it cannot be a replacement for them.

Alarmingly, however, many of the scientists interviewed on Expelled, including Dawkins, seem to think that religion is unnecessary and science can tell us all we need to know. If I’m not mistaken, one of the scientists in the movie literally says that science will eventually replace religion. This simply cannot be true—this way of thinking is logically fallacious and does not follow. Lets say, for example, that a vibrant art program is enacted in schools throughout the country and suddenly everyone thinks that art is now vitally important, while mathematics is worthless (an idea I almost agree with :P). Now, they want to replace math and teach only art instead. This is pure silliness—math and art are two completely different things, and one cannot be replaced by the other. But this is exactly what would be happening if religion was replaced by science. Although science is important, it cannot ever take the place of religion. Only religion offers answers to the deepest questions faced in life, and it will remain important always.