Fine, but by making "less factually incorrect statements about the universe" your measure of the good, you've essentially assumed what you're trying to show -- the superiority of Enlightenment-based notions of progress.
Fine, but by making "less factually incorrect statements about the universe" your measure of progress, you've essentially assumed what you're trying to show -- the superiority of Enlightenment-based, progressive civilization.
Not really. Someone can have a detailed and correct understanding of the universe and not have that impact there morals. What's relevant here is that some of those aspects directly inform morals. We know now that an Abrahamic deity is extremely unlikely or for that matter most other classical deity notions. Thus, morals, v...
If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.