The problem of Religion.

[Jaster Mereel]

It's been brought to my attention (I must have been oblivious before this time) that many of the atheists on this forum consider religion to be a problem, that needs to be solved somehow. Well, that being the case, I was wondering how you would solve it? Suggestions would be nice. Thanks.

 

[S.A.M.]

I'm not an atheist, but I've been listening to many of them and I have a few observations.

The only way to solve the problem of religion is to recognise that humanity is a myth.

There is no such thing as species, we are just genetic drift in the current of evolution.

As such there is no free will, morality is a myth (since evolution has no ethics, no rightness or wrongness) and we are deluding ourselves that our consciousness and selfhood makes us different from other animals.

In this spectrum, violence is the adaptive means by which man rids the environment of excess humans who compete for his resources, hence ensuring survival of the fittest (and more violent) genes.

Based on these observations both religion and humanism, which promote the human as a chosen or evolutionary pinnacle separate from other species are faith based adaptations with no real meaning.

One must let go of all concept of right or wrong, religion or humanity, and perceive oneself as nothing more than another accident of evolution, one which exerts its influence on the environment only to the extent that the environment permits, since drastic changes will result in hostile environments and eradication of the species with survival of perhaps the few who may have adaptations which enable them to persist (or not).

Just another drop in the ocean of evolution, subject to the vagaries of the environment and our ability to adapt to it, until finally we cannot.

 

[John99]

People go bannana's with belief's, cult's etc. and make the possibility of a creator a joke...it's a shame really.

The problem with religion is that it would in some instances be the antithesis of what the creator would want, destroying his greatest creation, freedom etc.

If a person is able to keep thing's in perspective, Religion can be a positve influence.

 

[spidergoat]

I wouldn't. Oppressing religionists only seems to strengthen their resolve to continue in their delusion. The masses will need their comfort in the coming dark ages. I intend to bury the most enlightened texts of our time in a clay jar somewhere for preservation.

SamCDkey,
The concepts of humanity and species do relate to some aspects of reality, we just have to recognize the limits of these definitions. The opposite of religion is not evolution, although that does serve to explain how we came about from the very first simple life. Humanity can develop ethics to better serve society, we don't have to treat evolution like a religion. Survival of the fittest does not mean survival of the most violent, but rather survival of the best survival strategy, which I think means ethical behavior. We must be good, not for fear of supernatural punishment, but for the value of goodness itself.

 

[Jaster Mereel]

I'm not an atheist, but I've been listening to many of them and I have a few observations.

The only way to solve the problem of religion is to recognise that humanity is a myth.

There is no such thing as species, we are just genetic drift in the current of evolution.

As such there is no free will, morality is a myth (since evolution has no ethics, no rightness or wrongness) and we are deluding ourselves that our consciousness and selfhood makes us different from other animals.

In this spectrum, violence is the adaptive means by which man rids the environment of excess humans who compete for his resources, hence ensuring survival of the fittest (and more violent) genes.

Based on these observations both religion and humanism, which promote the human as a chosen or evolutionary pinnacle separate from other species are faith based adaptations with no real meaning.

One must let go of all concept of right or wrong, religion or humanity, and perceive oneself as nothing more than another accident of evolution, one which exerts its influence on the environment only to the extent that the environment permits, since drastic changes will result in hostile environments and eradication of the species with survival of perhaps the few who may have adaptations which enable them to persist (or not).

Just another drop in the ocean of evolution, subject to the vagaries of the environment and our ability to adapt to it, until finally we cannot.

I actually know someone who thinks like this, and they have one of the most interesting, charming outlooks on the little things in life that I have ever heard of.

 

[KennyJC]

It's been brought to my attention (I must have been oblivious before this time) that many of the atheists on this forum consider religion to be a problem, that needs to be solved somehow. Well, that being the case, I was wondering how you would solve it? Suggestions would be nice. Thanks.

The most crucial steps are to get it out of schools and politics. The problems come when religion is no longer a personal belief, but when it is forced on people against their will and to their own detriment.

'End Times' nutjobs who rejoice in conflict and the decline of the environment because it signals to return of Jesus. My heart goes out to all those who are suffering a progressive illness who have no quality of life and suffer tremendous pain and can not be allowed to die peacefully because of the religious right. Or those with similar illnesses in which work for possible cures are being blocked because an adult human being has less of a right than that of a clump of cells. Also, those who follow religious authority (or have it rammed down their throat) who catch aids because they are being dogmatically taught safe sex from a religious perspective. Also those caught up in the religious conflicts in the past and present... catholics vs protestants, christians vs muslims and.... everyone vs jews.

 

[S.A.M.]

SamCDkey,
The concepts of humanity and species do relate to some aspects of reality, we just have to recognize the limits of these definitions. The opposite of religion is not evolution, although that does serve to explain how we came about from the very first simple life. Humanity can develop ethics to better serve society, we don't have to treat evolution like a religion. Survival of the fittest does not mean survival of the most violent, but rather survival of the best survival strategy, which I think means ethical behavior. We must be good, not for fear of supernatural punishment, but for the value of goodness itself.

Good or bad itself is a spectrum, the definition of which is arbitrary and defined by the ONLY thing that human action is defined by i.e. human needs.

The need for resources to propagate or maintain the species and the competition within the species for the same, make all definitions of morality null and void.

Everything is justifiable in the name of war.

Morality is just a feeling, it has no real basis in society, not when the existence of a set of people is threatened.

What is the best survival strategy? The continued presence of war and crime throughout the history of man ( history itself having no intrinsic meaning, since evolution is not defined by history, but is random and a reaction to the immediate environment), denies any importance of goodness as a survival strategy, since it is the more powerful and the more pitiless who have survived wars, not the ones who were more tolerant or more "good".

So we are all animals, fighting for OUR space OUR resources.

Morality is a fairytale we use to convince ourselves of our superiority and separateness as conscious and conscientous beings, which in reality does not exist.

 

[Cris]

......how you would solve it?

Ignore it.

Religion is rooted in the absence of knowledge. Science is increasingly filling that hole and leaving less for religion to grasp. I suspect we will eventually reach a cusp and religion will simply colapse. We need not do anything.

 

[S.A.M.]

I actually know someone who thinks like this, and they have one of the most interesting, charming outlooks on the little things in life that I have ever heard of.

Thinking is a free indulgence.

 

[spidergoat]

Good or bad itself is a spectrum, the definition of which is arbitrary and defined by the ONLY thing that human action is defined by i.e. human needs.

The need for resources to propagate or maintain the species and the competition within the species for the same, make all definitions of morality null and void.

Everything is justifiable in the name of war.

Morality is just a feeling, it has no real basis in society, not when the existence of a set of people is threatened.

What is the best survival strategy? The continued presence of war and crime throughout the history of man ( history itself having no intrinsic meaning, since evolution is not defined by history, but is random and a reaction to the immediate environment), denies any importance of goodness as a survival strategy, since it is the more powerful and the more pitiless who have survived wars, not the ones who were more tolerant or more "good".

So we are all animals, fighting for OUR space OUR resources.

Morality is a fairytale we use to convince ourselves of our superiority and separateness as conscious and conscientous beings, which in reality does not exist.

Evolution is indeed defined by history, or what went before. Evolution is not random, but feeds to some extent on chaos, nor is it purposeful. Species don't always compete with each other. Bees don't compete with flowers, and the antelope gains strength from the lion feeding on the weak. It is the good that avoid war in the first place, making meakness a strength. Pity and compassion also mitigate the dangers of war, since your enemy may think better of you, and chose peace (it worked for Ghandi). Morality is therefore a powerful tool in warfare. The Samurai era in Japan was rife with war, but was also a time of strict codes of behavior. Morality only has meaning in terms of society. War is a relatively recent invention, caused by man's unique success. There were periods of time on Earth, and places where warfare was unknown (or largely symbolic).

I agree we are not separate consciousnesses, all the more reason to act in a way that ensures the well-being of everyone, especially in an age where one person can end humanity with the push of a button. No supernatural being will come to our aid in the end, nor is an end pre-ordained. Existence is a blank sheet of paper, and we alone write the story of humanity.

 

[S.A.M.]

Evolution is indeed defined by history, or what went before. Evolution is not random, but feeds to some extent on chaos, nor is it purposeful. Species don't always compete with each other. Bees don't compete with flowers, and the antelope gains strength from the lion feeding on the weak. It is the good that avoid war in the first place, making meakness a strength. Pity and compassion also mitigate the dangers of war, since your enemy may think better of you, and chose peace (it worked for Ghandi). Morality is therefore a powerful tool in warfare. The Samurai era in Japan was rife with war, but was also a time of strict codes of behavior. Morality only has meaning in terms of society. War is a relatively recent invention, caused by man's unique success. There were periods of time on Earth, and places where warfare was unknown (or largely symbolic).

I agree we are not separate consciousnesses, all the more reason to act in a way that ensures the well-being of everyone, especially in an age where one person can end humanity with the push of a button. No supernatural being will come to our aid in the end, nor is an end pre-ordained. Existence is a blank sheet of paper, and we alone write the story of humanity.

I don't believe evolution is defined by history.

Does the eradication of one civilisation by another indicate the weakness of the genes of the eradicated civilisation?

Species only do not compete with each other when their needs do not overlap the same resources. The disappearance of hundreds of species from the earth is clear evidence of competition between species. Why did so many large mammals become extinct following the spread of what one may define as "the human plague"? Human beings are the most destructive of all species, they compete with all species for resouces and indiscriminately destroy the environment to fulfil their immediate and personal needs with little or no regard for the state of the environment.

Morality exists in a society only to fulfil the needs of that society. It has no other inherent value. When the concept of goodness does not interfere with resource allocation and species propagation, it is acceptable and provides a validation of the superiority of humanity (since both religion and secular humanism embrace the concept that humans are "better" and "more advanced" than other species).

However, if morality interferes with survival, it is immediately discarded, proving that it is a myth propagated by both religion and secular humanism.

PS All the strict codes of conduct in war are external manifestations of this "morality". They do not stop people from killing each other at any point in the midst of war.

 

[baumgarten]

The only effective pest control against religion is genocide.

 

[Jaster Mereel]

The only effective pest control against religion is genocide.

I second that motion.

 

[baumgarten]

Then it's settled. At midnight we all commit suicide. No one must be left alive; there is always the possibility that the accidental ingestion of LSD could inspire an intense and lasting delusion.

 

[lightgigantic]

Ignore it.

Religion is rooted in the absence of knowledge. Science is increasingly filling that hole and leaving less for religion to grasp. I suspect we will eventually reach a cusp and religion will simply colapse. We need not do anything.

On the contrary the holes presented by advancements in science seem to be widening - the old aphorism "The more you know the more you don't know" being a suitable epitah for empiricism

 

[Lord Insane]

I'm not an atheist, but I've been listening to many of them and I have a few observations.

The only way to solve the problem of religion is to recognise that humanity is a myth.

There is no such thing as species, we are just genetic drift in the current of evolution.

As such there is no free will, morality is a myth (since evolution has no ethics, no rightness or wrongness) and we are deluding ourselves that our consciousness and selfhood makes us different from other animals.

In this spectrum, violence is the adaptive means by which man rids the environment of excess humans who compete for his resources, hence ensuring survival of the fittest (and more violent) genes.

Based on these observations both religion and humanism, which promote the human as a chosen or evolutionary pinnacle separate from other species are faith based adaptations with no real meaning.

One must let go of all concept of right or wrong, religion or humanity, and perceive oneself as nothing more than another accident of evolution, one which exerts its influence on the environment only to the extent that the environment permits, since drastic changes will result in hostile environments and eradication of the species with survival of perhaps the few who may have adaptations which enable them to persist (or not).

Just another drop in the ocean of evolution, subject to the vagaries of the environment and our ability to adapt to it, until finally we cannot.

There is nothing wrong with good democratic civilization - it still have morals and considerations towards other people - even without the delusion of god/religion in the society .......

Evolution gave us brain and intelligence and even moral , so let us use it ...

Since civilization is marked by progress in arts and sciences - then I think science will evolve and give answers to questions , that originally were impossible to answer - and gave rise for explanations like something allmighty (god) created everything and the start of religions .....

No need to include delusion of religion/god into a good society .....

The solution to the problem of delusional religion is to inform people about its
problems, and then let them decide themselves, if they want to be delusional or to become free from the inhibitions of religion ....

There will allways be delusional people in the world, but as long as they are not allowed to impose their inhibitions of religion un the rest of us ..... then it is OK - after all religion can be entertaining and some people also need delusion to escape the reality of a hard life, or perhaps they just have the godgene .....

Definition of civilization : An advanced state of intellectual, cultural and material development in human society, marked by progress in the arts and sciences, the extensive use of record keeping, including writing, and the appearance of complex political and social institutions .......

 

[Lord Insane]

Good or bad itself is a spectrum, the definition of which is arbitrary and defined by the ONLY thing that human action is defined by i.e. human needs.

The need for resources to propagate or maintain the species and the competition within the species for the same, make all definitions of morality null and void.

Everything is justifiable in the name of war.

Morality is just a feeling, it has no real basis in society, not when the existence of a set of people is threatened.

What is the best survival strategy? The continued presence of war and crime throughout the history of man ( history itself having no intrinsic meaning, since evolution is not defined by history, but is random and a reaction to the immediate environment), denies any importance of goodness as a survival strategy, since it is the more powerful and the more pitiless who have survived wars, not the ones who were more tolerant or more "good".

So we are all animals, fighting for OUR space OUR resources.

Morality is a fairytale we use to convince ourselves of our superiority and separateness as conscious and conscientous beings, which in reality does not exist.

The best survival strategy of intelligent mankind is to form civilizations -
taking care of each other in the society works two ways - and science allows us to solve our problems in a better way .......

Morality in a civilization is made by political laws and the need for beeing able to live together in harmony in the society .....

 

[S.A.M.]

The best survival strategy of intelligent mankind is to form civilizations -
taking care of each other in the society works two ways - and science allows us to solve our problems in a better way .......

Morality in a civilization is made by political laws and the need for beeing able to live together in harmony in the society .....

You poor thing. Can't let go of the humanity delusion, huh?

"Intelligent mankind"? Just genetic drift.

It's ok. We all have our delusions.

 

[S.A.M.]

There is nothing wrong with good democratic civilization - it still have morals and considerations towards other people - even without the delusion of god/religion in the society .......

Evolution gave us brain and intelligence and even moral , so let us use it ...

Since civilization is marked by progress in arts and sciences - then I think science will evolve and give answers to questions , that originally were impossible to answer - and gave rise for explanations like something allmighty (god) created everything and the start of religions .....

No need to include delusion of religion/god into a good society .....

The solution to the problem of delusional religion is to inform people about its
problems, and then let them decide themselves, if they want to be delusional or to become free from the inhibitions of religion ....

There will allways be delusional people in the world, but as long as they are not allowed to impose their inhibitions of religion un the rest of us ..... then it is OK - after all religion can be entertaining and some people also need delusion to escape the reality of a hard life, or perhaps they just have the godgene .....

Definition of civilization : An advanced state of intellectual, cultural and material development in human society, marked by progress in the arts and sciences, the extensive use of record keeping, including writing, and the appearance of complex political and social institutions .......

Again, evolution is not good or bad. It does not make better or worse.

Civilisation is a myth, it is merely adaptation to secure the persistence of genes.

You have deluded yourself into believing you are an advanced animal, really you are nothing more than the triumph of bacteria, a factory created by them so their genes would survive effectively.

Get over it.

 

[S.A.M.]

- and science allows us to solve our problems in a better way .......

Science and technology are one more tool in the hand of evolution.

Would the holocaust have been possible without the telegraph, the train. the gas ovens?

Would the World Wars have happened without military aircraft, without bombs and tanks?

Would the still ongoing wars be possible without technology?

How many people can modern man kill with his bare hands?

This is all nothing but an increase in species number creating a pressure on environmental resources. Evolution has found the answer. Man will combat the pressure of increased species numbers by culling the excess humans. Whether he uses religion or science, they are merely tools.

There is no free will, it is all grist to the mills of evolution.