The replacement it needs is just as vigorous, sincere, compelling and satisfying but based on evidence and the nearest approximation to the truth that cannot be preached down to us by our competitors for minds in the religions

@Mcflewster yes or no?

@indirect76 Please allow me to add my 2 cents worth here.
Imo, the answer is a DEFINITE YES, because for the Human Race to advance both socially and scientifically to where it should have already arrived by now Religions, religious Preaching/teaching, Indoctrination/s, etc, etc, need to be CURTAILED either completely or to the level that their influences are almost non-existent.
For example, Stem cell research has shown that it has the great possibilities for saving lives from cancers, etc, etc, as well as the possibilities of actually growing new organs, such as hearts, etc, that are specific to the patient/s, BUT religions scream and cry crocodile tears every time when Stem cell Research gets a mention BECAUSE, in their tiny little, deluded minds the Scientists are either,
A) Trying to play or be God,
B) the Stem cells are taken from either aborted fetuses or those who were miscarried ( which btw, most are not, they usually are harvested from the Placentas, etc, after the baby has been born, though some stem cells are derived from test-tube fertilisations and ALWAYS done with the EXPRESSED permission of the donors,
C) " It goes against Gods great and mystical plan" is their usual fall-back cry.
I assume and suppose that NONE of these Cry-baby Faithfools have EVER sat at the bed-side of their child while it is dying slowly, painfully and terribly from cancer, because IF they had they would soon change their tune imo.

@indirect76 Of course yes it needs replacing, but IS everyone tuning away from it. I am surprised no one has nominated their favourite Non religious speaker to replace as many preachers as possible.

@Triphid Perhaps my original comment was misinterpreted to mean I think things are fine as is. I only asked if it should be replaced, not that I think it should not go away.

For info From Collins philosophy
an interpretive method in which the contradiction between a proposition (thesis) and its antithesis is resolved at a higher level of truth (synthesis).

Please define higher level of truth . Thanks

@Mcflewster ya, i think that’s a fancy way of saying whoever has the biggest dog wins? I have a good example using cassini here onsite, won’t search for whatever reason tho

@bbyrd009 Details of example???

@Mcflewster I’ll find it online...ah
"In 1676 an anomaly in the orbit of Io, Jupiter's innermost moon, led the astronomer Ole Roemer to make a very specific prediction. Io would appear from behind Jupiter at 5:37 pm on November 9, 1676, he said--and that would prove light travels with a finite speed. Roemer's mentor, Jean-Dominique Cassini, head of the Paris Observatory, rubbished the idea; light spread instantaneously, he said. His beliefs () led him to a different prediction. According to Cassini, it would be 5:27 when Io appeared.

Io appeared at 5:37 and 49 seconds. On hearing of this, Cassini announced that the facts fit with the story he had presented (faith). Although Cassini had made his (erroneous) prediction at a public gathering of scientists, not one of them demurred when he denied it; they all backed him up. Roemer had to wait fifty years to be vindicated; only after Cassini had died did scientists accept that the speed of light was finite."
[books.google.com]

more fun to get escorted out lol

My experience concurs.

@Mcflewster so, they are convincing bc they have some charisma and speak convincingly in gnostic statements, right, “if you don’t agree you’re going to hell” type stuff?

I spent 5 yrs with, and nearly married, the son of a Georgia preacher, whose previous wife was a psychologist. He had learned skills that no one should have, as I'm sure his previous 4+ wives would agree.

@bbyrd009 I agree. Who do you like to listen to with charisma but no preaching?

@Mcflewster well, the charisma might be part of the problem, dunno. I lean Noam Chomsky myself, but i guess we mostly like to listen to ppl who validate our views?

@bbyrd009 You are the only person who has mentioned their favourite non religious speaker and yes people do like Charisma. We should use it to the maximum . We do like it when celebrities of all sorts agree with us and "Come out' atheist etc. Charisma I imagine is very difficult to define or analyse.

@Mcflewster ya...and easy to abuse, i guess. When i detect charisma i've learned to go into skeptic mode lol

Great straight forward Post

That would be good Once we get genuine mind reading through brain scanning we can tell if they are thinking naughty thoughts in silence.

Could be as much the perhaps as opposed to the invariably gnostic declarations that preachers make, too...but silence is never a bad start i bet