TakeOnIt
Compare opinions of world leading experts and influencers.

The Catholic Church

vs.

Eliezer Yudkowsky

21%
Agreement

Scientific proofs [...] are valid only for things perceptible to the senses, since it is only on such things that scientific instruments of investigation can be used. To desire a scientific proof of God would be equivalent to lowering God to the level of the beings of our world, and we would therefore be mistaken methodologically in regard to what God is. Science must recognize its limits and its inability to reach the existence of God. It can neither affirm nor deny his existence.
10 Jul 1985    Source
Disagree Can science prove or disprove the existence of God? Agree
The vast majority of religions in human history - excepting only those invented extremely recently - tell stories of events that would constitute completely unmistakable evidence if they'd actually happened. The orthogonality of religion and factual questions is a recent and strictly Western concept. The people who wrote the original scriptures didn't even know the difference. ... The idea that religion is a separate magisterium which cannot be proven or disproven is a Big Lie...
04 Aug 2007    Source
He has a right to freedom in investigating the truth, and—within the limits of the moral order and the common good—to freedom of speech and publication...
11 Apr 1963    Source
Agree Is censorship acceptable? Disagree
Here's my proposal: Let's argue against bad ideas but not set their bearers on fire. ... My syllogism runs, "I think Susie said something wrong, therefore, I will argue against what she said, but I will not set her on fire, or try to stop her from talking by violence or regulation..."
15 Apr 2007    Source
Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity [and] the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back.
11 Oct 1992    Source
Disagree Is free will an illusion? Disagree
My position might perhaps be called "Requiredism." When agency, choice, control, and moral responsibility are cashed out in a sensible way, they require determinism - at least some patches of determinism within the universe. ... You are within physics, and so you/physics have determined the future. If it were not determined by physics, it could not be determined by you.
06 Jun 2008    Source
In the Catholic perspective, neo-Darwinians who adduce random genetic variation and natural selection as evidence that the process of evolution is absolutely unguided are straying beyond what can be demonstrated by science. Divine causality can be active in a process that is both contingent and guided. Any evolutionary mechanism that is contingent can only be contingent because God made it so.
23 Jul 2004    Source
Mostly Disagree Did complex life evolve through the process of natural selection? Agree
[By denying evolution you] engage in motivated cognition; and instead of focusing on the unthinkably huge heaps of evidence in favor of evolution, the innumerable signs by which the fact of evolution has left its heavy footprints on all of reality, ... ...instead you search your mind, and you pick out one form of proof that you think evolutionary biologists can't provide; and you demand, you insist upon that one form of proof; and when it is not provided, you take that as a refutation.
15 Feb 2010    Source
The eighth commandment forbids misrepresenting the truth in our relations with others. This moral prescription flows from the vocation of the holy people to bear witness to their God who is the truth and wills the truth. Offenses against the truth express by word or deed a refusal to commit oneself to moral uprightness: they are fundamental infidelities to God and, in this sense, they undermine the foundations of the covenant.
01 Jan 1992    Source
Agree Can we handle the truth? Mostly Disagree
I think that if there is ever a vow of honesty among rationalists, it will be restricted in scope. Normally, perhaps, you would avoid making statements that were literally false, and be ready to accept brutal honesty from anyone who first said "Crocker's Rules". Maybe you would be Radically Honest, but only with others who had taken a vow of Radical Honesty, and who understood the trust required to tell someone the truth.
10 Sep 2007    Source
The Last Judgment will reveal that God's justice triumphs over all the injustices committed by his creatures and that God's love is stronger than death.
11 Oct 1992    Source
Agree Is God just? Disagree
How is my religious family to comprehend it, working, as they must, from the assumption that [my brother] was murdered by a benevolent God? The same loving God, I presume, who arranges for millions of children to grow up illiterate and starving; the same kindly tribal father-figure who arranged the Holocaust and the Inquisition's torture of witches. I would not hesitate to call it evil, if any sentient mind had committed such an act, permitted such a thing.
18 Nov 2004    Source
The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God
01 Jan 1992    Source
Agree Does God exist? Disagree
I have weighed the evidence as best I can, and I do not believe the universe to be evil, a reply which in these days is called atheism.
18 Nov 2004    Source