>>29
In general, we may chose theology or science or indeed many of the other modes of human reasoning depending on the discussion, and the conclusion that we consider to be acceptable.
We champion "science is best" in our consumer because it makes a profit for someone to do so, just as "church is best" used to be employed in the old days, again because of the profit that was making someone. It doesn't follow that either are best in any given discussion.
>>30
Hmm... I hear the sofas in the slave labour camps that made the components of my luxurious computer in China are quite comfy.
>Profit/competition/war have driven man to do away with the weak
Nonsense. History has demonstrated that humans existed without war, profit or competition proir to approximately 3000BC for what is speculated to be a quarter of a million years at least. In fact it can be demonstrated that hujmanity went into decline as a whole when we adopted this non-cooperative approach life.
>You seem to be denying the work/reward of pretty much all of life is flawed for advancing it
Rubbish. Our rewards in a consumer society are at the expense of the vast experience of humanity in existence. I don't deny this for a second, but you seem blissfully unaware of it. Any argument that our current lifestyle is beneficial to humanity must indeed include all of humanity for it to be true. Our current lifestyle does nothing of the sort in a manner unprecedented in history.