Philosopher A.C. Grayling spoke about the shift in the role of religion over the ages, and how humanism can replace it.

In earlier times, says Grayling, science and religion were viewed as competitors. They both made truth claims regarding the origin and destiny of the universe, and they were both covering the same turf.

Now, as science has been taking over the job of explaining the material world, religion has moved to attending to the emotional needs of adherents.

He discussed the claim that religion was a kind of proto-science — a ‘first try’ at explaining the world. He rejects the claim thus: People often ask if humans came from monkeys, and the answer is, no, actually monkeys and humans came from a common ancestor. In like fashion, science and religion also had a common ancestor, which was ignorance. Science has had more success.

How could science have evolved from religion? Science uses trial and error, effort, observation, and reason. Religion uses prayer. Try lighting your house by prayer and see if it works. How different they are. It’s like the difference between a ham sandwich and a bicycle.

Science doesn’t solve our moral problems. It would be like asking a botanist how best to love your wife. But we do have arts, music, and literature. We also have a responsibility to help the less fortunate, and one thing we can do is reduce the opprsession of religious groups upon them.

Humanism is capable of speaking to the enjoyment or refreshment or transcendence of our deep emotions. There’s no spirituality required. And it does this in a much more honest way than religons do.

Grayling: “People ask me ‘Why do you speak against religion when it gives someone comfort when they’re old and alone?’ But how much better would it be if friends and neighbours were there to give that person love?”