Religion

[Cris]

Religion is the root of much evil.

There is no god, there is no messiah, there are no prophets plugged in to some divine will. There are no saints or holy men. If there is a heaven or a hell or any other kind of afterlife, we can’t know anything about it while we’re in this life, so it’s useless to speculate and foolish to believe. Faith is an empty box. To believe in Christ is to believe in a rabbit’s foot. To believe in the Buddha is to believe that pro wrestling is real. To believe in Mohammed is to believe that the groundhog can predict spring. To believe that the Ten Commandments came from some god on a mountaintop is to believe that television psychics can talk to your dead grandmother. Allah, Jehovah and the Trinity are elves and Tinkerbells. They are no more than desperate hope given a name and anthropomorphic shape by the imaginations of frightened men.

Religion is superstition. It is mankind crossing its fingers. Its sole functions are 1) to comfort and console those who cannot bear the suffering and death that are ultimately the lot of every human being, and 2) to offer meaning in a world where meaning can never be established. Religion, in other words, is a fortress of lies built to keep out the terrors of existence and nonexistence. For those in power, it is useful in still another way: Since time immemorial, the powerful have used religion to distract the oppressed, to encourage them to focus on the next world so that they will acquiesce to the injustices of this world. If you would have your slaves remain docile, teach them hymns.

On balance, religion has made the world a worse place. It has generated magnificent art and wonderful music and spectacular architecture, and millions of people have, over the centuries, done good and beautiful things in its name, but on balance it has not been good for the world. Those millions of good people would have done just as much good without it. Martin Luther King would have been a paragon of eloquent courage without having been baptized. Gandhi would have overturned an empire leaning only on his walking stick. Virtue would exist without Christianity or Judaism or Islam or Hinduism, which, in their vanity and vaporishness, are no different from the Roman’s belief in household gods or the Druid’s belief in tree spirits. A magic act is a magic act, whatever robes we clothe it in. But because of religions like these, the world has experienced centuries and centuries of backwardness and unnecessary suffering. Throats have been slit in their name, hearts exploded, the best minds distracted or destroyed, sweet people tortured.

How does it end, or how do we end it?

Edit - Full article for reference. http://www.memphisflyer.com/onthefly/onthefly_new.asp?ID=2277

 

[Clockwood]

True enough. I myself think that if there is a supreme-being of some sort it rues the fact that it revealed himself to mankind (if it ever did). We do have the bad habit of doing monsterous things in his name.

I think good people don't need religion as an excuse to do good but too many bad people use religion as an excuse to do evil and sometimes use it to let them sleep at night afterwards.

It will end with man slowly consuming all things and then turning to himself. Something may be left but you could no longer call it man.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by Cris

Religion is the root of much evil.

Non-sense, the root of all evil is lust, greed and envy.

There is no god,

Prove it!

There are no saints or holy men.

Non-sense!

If there is a heaven or a hell or any other kind of afterlife, we can’t know anything about it while we’re in this life, so it’s useless to speculate and foolish to believe.

If there are such places, then how can it be foolish to believe. The fact that you disbelieve it means it is possible to believe, given the information we have from great sages, the choice should be left to the individual.
It is pure desparation that drives you to want to oppress natural human instincts.
You don't believe, that's fine, but please don't force others to suppress their instincts, it is very dangerous.

faith is an empty box. To believe in Christ is to believe in a rabbit's foot. To believe in the Buddha is to believe that pro wrestling is real. To believe in Mohammed is to believe that the groundhog can predict spring.

To believe in the shite you are spewing forth is to surrender ones freedom.

They are no more than desperate hope given a name and anthropomorphic shape by the imaginations of frightened men.

You’re the one who sounds frightened.

Since time immemorial, the powerful have used religion to distract the oppressed, to encourage them to focus on the next world so that they will acquiesce to the injustices of this world.

You are confused, first you say religion is this and that, then you say man has used religion for this and that. So what is “religion” if it has been used for this and that, without the rascals interferance.

On balance, religion has made the world a worse place.

Non-sense, man and man alone has made this world a worse place. If he has misused religion, then it is his fault.

Throats have been slit in their name, hearts exploded, the best minds distracted or destroyed, sweet people tortured.

So you think if somehow “religion” or it’s proper terminology, “spirituality” could be somehow wiped out of the human psyche, non of these thing would occur…………….dream on brother.

How does it end, or how do we end it?

Anything which begins or ends, regarding mankind, is not in our hands, so just chill and get on with your life.
WHAT WILL BE, WILL BE.

Love
Jan Ardena.

 

[Bridge]

Religion is superstition. It is mankind crossing its fingers. Its sole functions are 1) to comfort and console those who cannot bear the suffering and death that are ultimately the lot of every human being, and 2) to offer meaning in a world where meaning can never be established.

Cris continues to exhibit delusions of grandeur by denying that someone can possibly know God on a personal level ('Religion is superstition') while at the same time claiming to know the truth herself. Atheist fundamentalism at its finest, you go girl.

 

[Cris]

Jan,

I thought the forum was becoming a little dull and needed some stimulation. Thanks for responding. Of course you are incorrect in every respect of your reply.

the root of all evil is lust, greed and envy.

That indeed lead to wars and power struggles between rival tribes and countries. What better way to convince your soldiers you can win if you have gods fighting for you? This was the pettiness of ancient times when many religions and gods and similar superstitions were devised.

There is no god,

Prove it!

Don’t be silly that is impossible. It’s a daft question. Why not do the honorable thing and prove me wrong by proving there is a god.

There are no saints or holy men.

Non-sense!

I think you can only say that with any honesty if you can prove there is a god.

If there are such places, then how can it be foolish to believe.

The point was that you can’t know they exist.

It is pure desparation that drives you to want to oppress natural human instincts. You don't believe, that's fine, but please don't force others to suppress their instincts, it is very dangerous.

You mean I could force you to do something you don’t want to do? Curious statements you make.

To believe in the shite you are spewing forth is to surrender ones freedom.

Indeed, but they are the claims that religionists spew out. And you cannot show otherwise.

You’re the one who sounds frightened.

How so? I have no expectation of a tyrannical god threatening me when I die or while I live.

You are confused, first you say religion is this and that, then you say man has used religion for this and that. So what is “religion” if it has been used for this and that, without the rascals interferance.

What is your point? Religions are entirely man made, and men in power have used such ideas to further their own ends throughout history.

On balance, religion has made the world a worse place.

Non-sense, man and man alone has made this world a worse place. If he has misused religion, then it is his fault.

Man indeed made religion, it is a shame that some did not have the courage to shout out earlier and object. But that was and is the oppressive nature of religion.

So you think if somehow “religion” or it’s proper terminology, “spirituality” could be somehow wiped out of the human psyche, non of these thing would occur…………….dream on brother.

Spirituality is just another aspect of religion and just more superstition. Only knowledge will allow the human psyche to see truth. How we teach the psyche not to believe fantasies is another issue for the healthy future of mankind.

Anything which begins or ends, regarding mankind, is not in our hands, so just chill and get on with your life.
WHAT WILL BE, WILL BE.

There seems to be 3 types of people, (1) those that make things happen, (2) those who have things happen to them, (3) and those who have no idea what is happening.

The history of mankind has been shaped by the (1)s. You appear to be just another passenger.

Love
Cris

 

[Cris]

Bridge,

Cris continues to exhibit delusions of grandeur by denying that someone can possibly know God on a personal level ('Religion is superstition')

Then prove me wrong rather than just make baseless claims that I am wrong. Your words are as vacuous as mine if you cannot support them. All you have to do is prove your claim, prove that a god exists.

while at the same time claiming to know the truth herself.

But you don’t know that I am not correct. You can’t show that I am wrong can you? Why are you any different to me then? Aren’t your claims for me equally applicable to your own fantasies?

Atheist fundamentalism at its finest, you go girl.

A probable better match for religious fundamentalism since out of the vast amount of writings concerning religion, no religious text or any religious statement anywhere has yet to show any hint that a god could exist let alone does exist. At least nothing that cannot be refuted by a more rational material explanation, if not just as imaginative.

 

[spookz]

trolling chris?

 

[Cris]

Shoosh!

Perhaps I should invite Whatsupyall back.

 

[Tiassa]

Knowledge

As with all ignorance, knowledge is the cure.

How to decontextualize the knowledge so that it can have its effects without the burden of interpersonal and psychospiritual politics is its own debate.

And, strangely, very few people ever care to undertake such issues.

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by Cris
On balance, religion has made the world a worse place.

I seriously doubt it. More importantly, in my opinion the assertion is wholly unsubstantiated (and unprovable) and, as such, no more warranted than any other statement of faith.

 

[Cris]

CA,

On balance, religion has made the world a worse place.

… in my opinion the assertion is wholly unsubstantiated (and unprovable) and, as such, no more warranted than any other statement of faith.

I agree of course, there is little in the opening post that is substantiated, but…

I seriously doubt it.

And this is substantiated, how?

But why would you doubt it? The speculation would be what the world would have been like without religion and what conditions would need to apply for religion not to have arisen.

Is religion the natural result of the human psyche or is it the result of key events in history? You have a better grounding in that area than I, so do you have an opinion?

Had religion not been so dominant would it have led to greater or lesser standards of life?

Perhaps if a different set of world leaders had come to power in ancient times that were more adept at critical thinking then perhaps religions would not have gained so much control and the masses would not have been so brainwashed, or perhaps the overwhelming lack of real knowledge of the universe simply led to the rise of superstition regardless of what leaders were in power.

I’m not convinced that your doubt has any more validity than the above claim.

 

[James R]

*shifting to the other end of the seesaw for a while*

<i>Religion is the root of much evil.</i>

Yes. So is lack of religion, arguably.

<i>There is no god, there is no messiah, there are no prophets plugged in to some divine will.</i>

That's just your unsupported opinion.

<i>There are no saints or holy men.</i>

Then a lot of people have written a lot of words about non-existent people...

<i>If there is a heaven or a hell or any other kind of afterlife, we can’t know anything about it while we’re in this life, so it’s useless to speculate and foolish to believe.</i>

Tell me you're not saying it's foolish to believe in something which is true. 'cos that's what this sounds like.

<i>Faith is an empty box. To believe in Christ is to believe in a rabbit’s foot. To believe in the Buddha is to believe that pro wrestling is real. To believe in Mohammed is to believe that the groundhog can predict spring. To believe that the Ten Commandments came from some god on a mountaintop is to believe that television psychics can talk to your dead grandmother.</i>

I think most religions worth their salt are just a little more complex than the things you're comparing them to.

<i>Allah, Jehovah and the Trinity are elves and Tinkerbells. They are no more than desperate hope given a name and anthropomorphic shape by the imaginations of frightened men.</i>

Says you. Others disagree. And round we go again...

<i>Religion is superstition. It is mankind crossing its fingers. Its sole functions are 1) to comfort and console those who cannot bear the suffering and death that are ultimately the lot of every human being, and 2) to offer meaning in a world where meaning can never be established.</i>

Do you truly believe those are its <b>sole</b> functions? No wonder you're such a committed atheist.

<i>On balance, religion has made the world a worse place.</i>

Worse than what? As ConsequentAtheist said, you have no idea (and <b>can</b> have no idea) what it would have been like without religion. This is an empty statement.

<i>Those millions of good people would have done just as much good without it.</i>

Again, this is pure speculation.

<i>But because of religions like these, the world has experienced centuries and centuries of backwardness and unnecessary suffering.</i>

Monasteries, at least, were the centre of intellectual life for many centuries. In fact, many of the most learned people in history have been deeply religious. Often, they were educated in a religious setting. I'd say that, on a balance, religion has promoted enlightened thought.

<i>Throats have been slit in their name, hearts exploded, the best minds distracted or destroyed, sweet people tortured.</i>

Yes, and people have been also been saved in their name, hearts dedicated to helping others, and minds elevated from the mundane to seek something more.

<i>How does it end, or how do we end it?</i>

Should we want to end it?

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by Cris
And this is substantiated, how? ... Is religion the natural result of the human psyche or is it the result of key events in history? You have a better grounding in that area than I, so do you have an opinion?

Come on, Chris, you're better than this. The development of religious ritual (er.g., burial customs) and, eventually, religion in early human society was pervasive. The only "key event" was the social development of the species itself.

Originally posted by Cris
Perhaps if a different set of world leaders had come to power in ancient times ...

Anachronistic bullpuckie, and you know it.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Jan,
I thought the forum was becoming a little dull and needed some stimulation.

Cris,
This is just the tonic man, ride on. Now I’m beginning to see you as a moderator, respect is due!!!!!!
But you’re still talking a barrel of shite!

What better way to convince your soldiers you can win if you have gods fighting for you?

Errrr……I dunno…….all the women you can rape?
A seat on the board of the conservative social club?
A 10 year season ticket to see the Arsenal?
Its all relative and has nothing to do with religion.

This was the pettiness of ancient times when many religions and gods and similar superstitions were devised.

I read and read and read Bhagavad Gita, and still cannot grasp you’re point. Maybe you can point it out for me, eh?

Don’t be silly that is impossible. It’s a daft question. Why not do the honorable thing and prove me wrong by proving there is a god.

What is it you chaps always spout?
I know! I know!
The burden of proof lies with the person who makes the claim. Now, from where I’m sitting, you are the one making claims, sooooooooooooo……………….
I’ll tell you what, as we both know you cannot prove or disprove either claim, let us have a proper discussion on the matter and see who can corner who. Eh? Waddyasay?

I think you can only say that with any honesty if you can prove there is a god.

What is the difference between proving there is a god and proving there isn’t a god?

The point was that you can’t know they exist.

There are lots of thing we can’t know, but have to take the word of an authority, and even then one still has to understand through analytical study of self, science, and word, and we could still be wrong. No one said it was easy Cris.

You mean I could force you to do something you don’t want to do? Curious statements you make.

Most probably not Cris, but of course there are ways and means of controlling people.

Indeed, but they are the claims that religionists spew out. And you cannot show otherwise.

If that is the case, then, imho, they are wrong

How so? I have no expectation of a tyrannical god threatening me when I die or while I live.

Then live and let live. From what I can understand you are a bright chap, with an excellent career and (most probably) lifestyle. So why bust your gut about something you have no real interest in?

What is your point? Religions are entirely man made, and men in power have used such ideas to further their own ends throughout history.

Okay, you have a point. But, consider this. There are two men both digging a hole, they are garbed the same, same ethnic background, same height etc….One man is digging the hole to plant some veg to feed his family, the other to bury his child whom he just murdered for kicks.
Same activity (from the outside), different consciousness. Do you get my drift.
The thing is, (and I say this to theist especially) the institution has no value, but the consciousness behind it is all that matters.

Man indeed made religion, it is a shame that some did not have the courage to shout out earlier and object. But that was and is the oppressive nature of religion.

Meditate on the above.

Spirituality is just another aspect of religion and just more superstition.

Hey! Guess what? I disagree. Spirituality is knowledge of ones self, outside of the mundane. Some of us feel there is more to us than meat, so we feel inclined to know more. Some of us are satisfied with our lot. But it is not superstition, “superstition” is superstition.

Only knowledge will allow the human psyche to see truth. How we teach the psyche not to believe fantasies is another issue for the healthy future of mankind.

I agree.

There seems to be 3 types of people, (1) those that make things happen, (2) those who have things happen to them, (3) and those who have no idea what is happening.
The history of mankind has been shaped by the (1)s. You appear to be just another passenger.
Love
Cris

Maybe you are right. All I can say is, I am what I am, and have to a certain degree, go with my instinct.
I have a tremendous respect for serious scientists, and through their brilliance, the scriptures are becoming more illuminated.
This is a great time to be alive, and I’m enjoying the ride, so yes, maybe I am just another passenger.
Love
Jan Ardena.
P.S. I hope you weren’t being sarcastic when you said “Love Cris.”

 

[=SputniK-CL=]

Hi Jan...

Remember me...I have been meditating and concluded that you have made some good points on faith...

"The only true wisdom is knowing you know nothing" I believe this without question. To me, what my instincts tell me Jan and what most of history shows, is that human nature is imperfect and relies on delusions of increasing variety. Ever read the Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan?

Still, most of the major religions condemn by implication to eternal suffering anyone who dont live by the given rules. This irritates me, for it seems to be a supreme arrogance...

Do you agree with me?

"So why bust your gut about something you have no real interest in?"

Isnt the answer obvious? I dont need the concept of God. I can tolerate people believing God. But as mentioned above, religion generally doesnt want to be left alone, it wants to dominate, to have it its way or no other way...believe or you burn...this is why you should try busting your gut every opportunity. Because religion in GENERAL goes against the democratic way & scientific principles.

Because it claims to have a monopoly on the truth...and this, as has been demonstrated many times in history, is folly...

P.S. Ever heard of Ocaams razor? Its MUCH simpler to explain religion in terms of human fantasy than in terms of the divine...I really think humans would do anything to obtain absolute certainty...dont you??

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by =SputniK-CL=
Still, most of the major religions condemn by implication to eternal suffering anyone who dont live by the given rules. This irritates me, for it seems to be a supreme arrogance...

Perhaps the ignorance is yours. Can you, for example, show us the doctine eternal damnation maintained by Judaism and Hinduism? Or are you simply modelling the "supreme arrogance" that you find so irritating?

 

[Cris]

James,

*shifting to the other end of the seesaw for a while*

Noted.

Religion is the root of much evil.

Yes. So is lack of religion, arguably.

Yet it is religion that is the issue. There seems considerable evidence from history that many bad things have been done in the name of religion and even today we have Osama Bin Laden and many others still doing such things in the name of religion.

So is religion the root of the evil or perhaps it is really evil men that corrupt the idea of religion for their own perverted purposes. It is not difficult to see the perversion of Osama but what of ordinary people like us who have lived these past 2000 years or more. Are we evil because of the influence of evil religion or have most people simply been confused by religion and have simply gone along with whatever authority has been in power?

There seems little doubt that those who follow a religion do so because it is linked to their local culture. And this is the case for the majority of people. In a predominantly Christian country you are likely to be Christian; in an Islamic country you are likely to be a Muslim, etc. People tend to act like sheep and simply follow the leader, whether right or wrong.

Had people been educated in critical thinking in early times then would religion ever have arisen? Perhaps we should make a clearer distinction between religion and what Jan calls spirituality. Even Raithere admits to some degree of spirituality, and so did Einstein.

As a concept Religion has played a major role in history and is obviously still active today. But in my everyday life I rarely come across religious influences when working with ‘ordinary’ folk. It seems to be very much under the surface if it is there at all.

Religion seems to be no more than a place to visit that gives answers to questions that we haven’t properly answered yet. In early times this role was a major influence on the lives of ordinary people, but now it is the exception. Many of the answers offered by religion were plain wrong and science has replaced those errors with facts. Can religion be considered evil for giving answers that were simply wrong because it was ignorant? Evil is perhaps too strong a term, perhaps irresponsible would be more accurate.

There is no god, there is no messiah, there are no prophets plugged in to some divine will.

That's just your unsupported opinion.

Perhaps, but certainly comments that are likely from a Strong Atheist. But Judaism and Islam do not believe there has been a messiah, which feels like support.

As for no God; to a large extent I feel that making the statement is redundant. Such a negative can’t be proved. We could perhaps appeal to credibility, but that is too subjective for many. If there is no god then the world and the universe will continue as is and man will eventually give up claiming there is a god when no supernatural events continue to not occur. But man tends to be very pragmatic. Faced with an obvious danger most will take action to defend themselves, very few will stop in the path of the danger and pray as their primary defense. I often wonder how many people desperately prayed for their lives as they attempted to escape from the World Trade center but died anyway.

Survival still seems to be a matter of practical thought and action. Praying to a god that you will not catch a particular disease seems fine but actual vaccinations seem wise.

I think the more important issue is the claims for souls/spirits, since if there are no such things then the issue of whether there is a god or not will take on a very different perspective. When/if AI does occur and machines become clearly self-aware with full human like emotions and compassion, then what then for the claims for souls?

There are no saints or holy men.

Then a lot of people have written a lot of words about non-existent people...

Or perhaps simply mislabeled them.

If there is a heaven or a hell or any other kind of afterlife, we can’t know anything about it while we’re in this life, so it’s useless to speculate and foolish to believe.

Tell me you're not saying it's foolish to believe in something which is true. 'cos that's what this sounds like.

I think the point here is that it is foolish to believe something that you don’t know is true, since it may well be false.

Faith is an empty box. To believe in Christ is to believe in a rabbit’s foot. To believe in the Buddha is to believe that pro wrestling is real. To believe in Mohammed is to believe that the groundhog can predict spring. To believe that the Ten Commandments came from some god on a mountaintop is to believe that television psychics can talk to your dead grandmother.

I think most religions worth their salt are just a little more complex than the things you're comparing them to.

But when the perceived complexity is reduced all that is left at the root is a belief in a key concept that has no substance, i.e. the box is eventually found to be empty. And emptiness in one box is not very dissimilar to the emptiness in another.

Jesus said believe in me and you shall have everlasting life and that the only way to heaven is through me. There is no proof or evidence this is true and must be believed on faith. The rest of the bible and the millions of books written on the subject are just the unnecessary complexity.

Allah, Jehovah and the Trinity are elves and Tinkerbells. They are no more than desperate hope given a name and anthropomorphic shape by the imaginations of frightened men.

Says you. Others disagree. And round we go again...

Oh, I agree, but in a real way if no one disagrees, whether supported or not then the, equally irrational claimants will feel they have truth.

Religion is superstition. It is mankind crossing its fingers. Its sole functions are 1) to comfort and console those who cannot bear the suffering and death that are ultimately the lot of every human being, and 2) to offer meaning in a world where meaning can never be established.

Do you truly believe those are its sole functions? No wonder you're such a committed atheist.

I feel somewhat neutral on the statement. But yes those probably are close to the primary functions of religion. That religions do other things and affect society in other ways are just secondary.

My atheism seems to be more of an inevitable consequence of other more serious pursuits that I am following objectively. The fact that many find the issue contentious and want to fight/debate it is a pleasant bonus.

On balance, religion has made the world a worse place.

Worse than what? As ConsequentAtheist said, you have no idea (and can have no idea) what it would have been like without religion. This is an empty statement.

You mean like what would the lives of millions of Jews have been like had millions of their relatives not been killed in the holocaust?

During those times of persecution of anyone who questioned the wisdom of the Church how many potential scientists decided not to pursue their real desires because they feared the church. How many cures and how much new knowledge was lost because such research was severely repressed, stopped, never started, and brutally discouraged?

I think we can be certain that scientific discovery was prevented and that current human knowledge is significantly less because of those evil times.

So yes, on balance religion has made the world a worse place than it could have been had religion not been so oppressive. When told that a god will answer all questions then why would science ever have been supported?

Those millions of good people would have done just as much good without it.

Again, this is pure speculation.

Some 1.2 billion people in the world are considered non-religious, they seem to be doing OK. US prison inmate populations show slightly fewer atheists than the normal ratio in the outside world.

And we have already established that most people follow religion because they are told to.

In this light I see no reason to believe that religion has added much that would not have been achieved had they not existed.

But because of religions like these, the world has experienced centuries and centuries of backwardness and unnecessary suffering.

Monasteries, at least, were the centre of intellectual life for many centuries. In fact, many of the most learned people in history have been deeply religious. Often, they were educated in a religious setting. I'd say that, on a balance, religion has promoted enlightened thought.

I suspect that natural human curiosity and desire to learn, adapt, and invent, would have created equally if not better institutions that would have encouraged a more open minded view of universal possibilities. The perpetual notion that a god did it must have imposed significant restrictions on those past thinkers.

But we are both being speculative here, although I’m not sure that is so bad.

Throats have been slit in their name, hearts exploded, the best minds distracted or destroyed, sweet people tortured.

Yes, and people have been also been saved in their name, hearts dedicated to helping others, and minds elevated from the mundane to seek something more.

The speculation here is whether man could have created a more logical system and hence achieved much more or whether he would have descended into anarchy. As someone non-religious and an average human I do not find anything in me that would endorse anarchy and would not have taken action to prevent it.

How does it end, or how do we end it?

Should we want to end it?

If it isn’t true then most people in the world are living a fantasy. I cannot believe that that state is in any way healthy.

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by Cris
The speculation here is whether man could have created a more logical system and hence achieved much more or whether he would have descended into anarchy.

You show a politicians ability to redefine yourself on the run. We are dealing, not with specious speculation concerning the relationship, if any, between the development of religion and the descent into anarchy, but with your assertion that: "On balance, religion has made the world a worse place." Your subsequent reference to anarchy is simply a red herring. Can you suggest a single anthropologist who argues either (a) that religion served to fend off anarchy, or (b) that anarchy was the likely alternative to the development of religion.?

Originally posted by Cris
As someone non-religious and an average human I do not find anything in me that would endorse anarchy and would not have taken action to prevent it.

Good for you. Perhaps our prehistoric ancestors were not so enlightened as you. They probably didn't brush their teeth as often either. So what?

I can go on for quite some time enumerating specific vicious excesses carried out in the name of religion, but I have no reason and, more to the point, you've offered no reason, to believe that these come close, in number or extent, to the acts of kindness, charity, and support promoted by religious communities. Demonization of religion is simply infantile.

 

[Bridge]

Good golly! You don't know how enjoyable it is to see two atheists duke it out over religion.

C.A. has you by the short hairs Cris. You're running out of wriggle room. Time to go back to football, another great contribution of religion.

 

[Tiassa]

Two cents or so

Can you suggest a single anthropologist who argues either (a) that religion served to fend off anarchy, or (b) that anarchy was the likely alternative to the development of religion.?

I'll pitch in two cents here. Few if any anthropologists, sociologists, historians, or psychologists would agree with either proposition explicitly. In the context of Part A, though, Mircea Eliade, Sir James Frazier, and others wrote of the amount of social influence in such associations as the religious. What that means, relative to Part B is that while anarchy is not the open and only alternative to the development of religion, the reason for religion's role in social order is that religion is imaginative and therefore seemingly easier to the individual to abide by. Do parents still teach their children proper association to fire, or am I expected to let my daughter run loose with a jetflame blowtorch pipelighter? (e.g 1300° Farenheit ... and that's kind of a serious question, too ... my first run-in with fire also led to my first conscious lies at age four.)

But I'm a fan of Agni--after a fashion--in the sense that the fire god is a powerful illustration. Rituals surrounding the fire god most likely, at the dawn of human religion, had much to do with respectful regard for fire. It seemed alive, was willing to eat you if you let it &c. Obviously because of methods of inquiry and knowledge, there wasn't the technical base that tells us what we do know in the modern day about the nature and behavior of fire. It's fair to say that it was at the dawn of humanity easier to say, "Don't let the fire-beast eat you," than it was to actually figure out what was really going on.

The problem with religion is that humanity evolves; because of our physiological evolution, our interpersonal relations--e.g. society, for instance?--also change. But we see that social evolution is (A) not instantaneous in response to physiological evolution, or (B) independent to a certain degree from that evolution, thus making the first sentence of this paragraph partially invalid. Okay, so maybe it's time to stop writing one-drafters.

Society has evolved to a point where the current dominant religions are simply unable to keep up with the introduction of new information (e.g. knowledge) and its effects (e.g. social and personal repercussions). And again a note on one-drafters, for any hair-splitters who might have noticed that the social and personal repercussions also qualify as information, and some of it new.

Whether or not humanity is done with the tool overtly called religion remains to be seen. But what of other analogous processes that we don't call religion simply for the lack of a godhead? It used to be that you could say someone had "religious" zeal for a cause and people understood what that meant; of course, that same condition is also accounted for under a morally neutralized definition of "bigot". (And people have split the "bigot" hair at Sciforums before ....)

A loose analogy: Once upon a time at Exosci there was an argument about reclassification of pedophilia. Crime politics screamed against the reclassification because it made pedophilia harder to punish satisfactorily to the politics. Mental health advocates saw the benefit of seeing pedophilia as symptomatic of other causes because the direct approach simply wasn't working.

In the same sense, is religion itself the fundamental disease, or is it the symptom?

Honor and virtue? What are those but, like God and Heaven, empty words? And anyone who tells me that honor and virtue have no blood on their hands will be laughed at.

Humans are social creatures. One of the biggest mistakes we make is to surrender to our competitive nature. We are cooperative, else whence comes society? Certes, the cooperative spirit appears to be sublimated, but this may be the result of superstition insofar as current trends of knowledge point toward the inferiority and danger of human internecene competition. We will always seek our most favored aesthetic in our partnerships, but beyond mating and food distribution (which should not be a problem in this world except for "empty words", e.g. the words of politics), well ... I mean, take a look at the world we're capable of making. We've been to the moon ... and hell, the World Trade Center had to be built before it could be knocked down. The Chinese, as I recall, are about to attempt to house an entire city (200,000 people or so) in a single structure. We wage and regularly win major interspecies wars with nature. (HIV, Ebola, and a few others present formidable new opponents, but we are the human species--we do not lose. What? We haven't yet. It's only the theoretic assertion that we can't possibly win every time that speaks against it. The fact that we are still here provides pretty objective evidence that we haven't lost outright. Beyond that, yes we can get existential and metaphysical if we really need.)

Religions, despite the inherent mindwashing effect, are cooperative associations. Not between them, but that's just a result of human ignorance. It seems to me that on a species-wide level, at the most morally relative I can manage short of utter nihilism, religion and other irrationalities have served us reasonably well in the face of our ignorance. However, when I start reintroducing myths like "human value", "rights", and other "virtuous" notions we hold dear in our hearts (for what objective reasons?) my distaste for the religious endeavor grows.

Climbing away from the Valley of Death was very easily done. But escaping the irrationality of Christianity was a very interesting voyage that was built entirely on faith, specifically in trusting in that which has come before me. Satanism taught me the paucity of the identity-politic. Witchcraft and pseudo-qabalism taught me the falsehood of Hollywood-like magickal expectation. Emma Goldman drove the first real nail in her essay, "Anarchism: What it really stands for". In the end there are a few human mysteries left that one can qualify as magickal, or, at least mystical in the sense that they are mystifying, mysterious ... I'll skip the alliterated litany ... and, by superstitious definition, magickal.

That I sometimes call myself an anti-prophet has little to do with religion and everything to do with history and politics. I'm not predicting the future. I'm making bad jokes and they're coming true. That tells me more that I'm looking at factors relevant to the issue I'm examining rather than suggesting any magickal clairvoyance.

So it seems to me that if I can do it, anyone can. And in my impatient moments I do resort to the irrational sentiment of, "What the hell is taking people so long?"

But the simplest reality to express here is that it is still easier to rely on "Because ___ says so" to describe an imperfect social-cooperative order than it is to risk against our human imperfection and gain the knowledge and wisdom to build a less-imperfect social-cooperative. Or, in a more reasonable term, to build a more efficient society.

I tend to think that religion is symptomatic. Every human is ignorant to a certain degree, and every human fears what they are ignorant of. After all, is it not oft-asserted around this forum that religions stem from the most basic human fear of all, the fear of death? Religion, politics ... we fear what we do not understand. Knowledge brings understanding and strengthens against fear (there is no monster in the closet), fewer things to fear means fewer things to defend against. And when we stop feeling so compelled to protect ourselves against our neighbors in order to appease our fear of death, well, there will be fewer irrational barriers to cooperation and progress.