“After all, what new insights has religion produced in the last century?”

— Jerry Coyne, book Faith vs. Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible

Source: Faith vs. Fact (2015), p. 17

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "After all, what new insights has religion produced in the last century?" by Jerry Coyne?

Jerry Coyne154

American biologist 1949

Related quotes

“Computer programming is like the ability or skill to see what Picasso saw from all the different angles at once. If it is an art, the crucial element of art is to look at things from an angle that produces new insight or at least has that potential.”

Erik Naggum (1965–2009) Norwegian computer programmer

Re: Guide to Lisp, v1.20 http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/f7bc99564506e851 (Usenet article). <br class="br">Usenet articles, Miscellaneous

“Transhumanism can offer new insights and unorthodox solutions to insurmountable problems that have stumped politicians for years, decades, and centuries.”

Newton Lee American computer scientist

Google It: Total Information Awareness, 2016

“New insight begins when satisfaction comes to an end, when all that has been seen, said, or done looks like a distortion.”

Abraham Joshua Heschel (1907–1972) Polish-American Conservative Judaism Rabbi

Source: Who Is Man? (1965), Ch. 5
Context: New insight begins when satisfaction comes to an end, when all that has been seen, said, or done looks like a distortion. … Man's true fulfillment depends on communion with that which transcends him.

“A tornado of thought is unleashed after each new insight. This in turn results in an earthquake of assumptions. These are natural disasters that re-shape the spirit.”

Vera Nazarian (1966) American writer

Source: The Perpetual Calendar of Inspiration

“Religion, after all, is nothing but an hypothesis framed to account for what is evidentially unaccounted for.”

H.L. Mencken (1880–1956) American journalist and writer

The American Mercury (February 1926)
1920s
Context: By what route do otherwise sane men come to believe such palpable nonsense? How is it possible for a human brain to be divided into two insulated halves, one functioning normally, naturally and even brilliantly, and the other capable only of such ghastly balderdash which issues from the minds of Baptist evangelists? Such balderdash takes various forms, but it is at its worst when it is religious. Why should this be so? What is there in religion that completely flabbergasts the wits of those who believe in it? I see no logical necessity for that flabbergasting. Religion, after all, is nothing but an hypothesis framed to account for what is evidentially unaccounted for. In other fields such hypotheses are common, and yet they do no apparent damage to those who incline to them. But in the religious field they quickly rush the believer to the intellectual Bad Lands. He not only becomes anaesthetic to objective fact; he becomes a violent enemy of objective fact. It annoys and irritates him. He sweeps it away as something somehow evil...