I mean. I’d argue that the group that more frequently questions its positions and beliefs based on new evidence without killing a significant portion of a country, is a safer source for interpreting the world than the group that killed 40% of Germany when one assumption, regarding the authority of the bishop of Rome, was in dispute for the first time in several centuries.
Of course. The ironic point is that plenty of people believed the old versions of what research showed dinosaurs were until they died. Some in denial of new research, like the presence of feathers.
Humans are dogmatic about more than just religion.
I mean. I’d argue that the group that more frequently questions its positions and beliefs based on new evidence without killing a significant portion of a country, is a safer source for interpreting the world than the group that killed 40% of Germany when one assumption, regarding the authority of the bishop of Rome, was in dispute for the first time in several centuries.
Of course. The ironic point is that plenty of people believed the old versions of what research showed dinosaurs were until they died. Some in denial of new research, like the presence of feathers.
Humans are dogmatic about more than just religion.