CreateDebate


Debate Info

14
17
yes its spiritual need no its just human made error
Debate Score:31
Arguments:28
Total Votes:31
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 yes its spiritual need (11)
 
 no its just human made error (11)

Debate Creator

virag2905(5) pic



Religion a weapon of destruction or construction

what is religion actualy in todays world, when we see people fighting over it , at some cases its so violent that its making massacres, do really we need religion ?

yes its spiritual need

Side Score: 14
VS.

no its just human made error

Side Score: 17

It's true that Religion has been the cause for wars for centuries. Religion has persecuted many people, too. Religion does have an evil side when a group of people or an individual thinks his Religion is the only one that is the true Religion and anyone who is not of his Faith is an enemy.

To be adversarial, Religion does have a very nice side when people use Religion to help the poor and misfortunate ones in this world and to promote world peace and end war. This is where Religion is good.

Side: yes its spiritual need
Jace(5222) Clarified
3 points

Notably, not a single benefit you associate with religion is unique to religion.

Side: yes its spiritual need
14giraffes(87) Clarified
2 points

Nothing has build so many hospitals or charities for the poor as religion.

So in terms of it's overwhelming weight of support religiosity is truly unique.

Side: yes its spiritual need
2 points

This debate is worded erroneously. I do not believe that religion is the basic reason for any form of destruction or creation. We have witnessed many remarkable events inspired by religion and we have seen much destruction done in the name of religion. However, it depends mostly on man's understanding. No religion teaches destruction and deterioration it is just taken as an excuse for people to project their own violence and 'dark side' wrongly justifying it under the name of religion.

Although many people now do not believe in religion however a study of religions will clearly show that none of them inspire to destroy, rather it encourages to create.

Side: yes its spiritual need
1 point

Many if not most religious people have a problem with the term "Religion", which should be interchangeable with "spirituality" but is misread for an exclusively institutional definition.

Side: yes its spiritual need
1 point

Religion has the capacity to influence emotions in the intensest measure. I claim that the positive massively outweighs the negative. Episodes like the crusades and witch hunts have political and logical motives. The abuse of interpretation is the substantive issue. Biblical passages that critics use to sight violence, like the Psalms, are not central to the general message of the Bible which is a message of peace when looked at collectively as a whole. There exists major themes that run throughout the Bible vs. a hand full of passages. Same is true with the Koran.

Side: yes its spiritual need

In order to stabilize landscapes and shield properties from potential harm, retaining walls play a critical defensive role against these forces. | retaining walls construction

Side: yes its spiritual need
4 points

Religion seems to be responsible for both. However its also clear that both destructive and constructive actions are able to exist completely without religion. This suggests that both are a part of humanity. Destruction -vs- Construction are seen as evil -vs- good. These are both interpretations of actions of men, by men. The criteria being whether we are living together destructively or constructively.

This human potential for evil and for good have nothing to do with religion.

Side: no its just human made error
1 point

I do not believe in the "spirit" or the "soul" any more than I believe in any religion. However, the overwhelming majority of people do and have done throughout our history. Research indicates that people are genetically and cognitively predisposed to these beliefs, the implication being that religion is an evolved psychological attribute beneficial to the majority of the species (though notably not necessary for every member).

"Need" is perhaps not quite the word; it would be more accurate to observe that people simply have it or they do not consequent to evolutionary determinism. Calling religion a "human error" similarly implies a willful self-determination, a deliberate and conscious creation of religion, which simply does not exist.

Side: no its just human made error
14giraffes(87) Clarified
2 points

"Even though the realms of religion and science in themselves are clearly marked off from each other, nevertheless there exist between the two strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies. Though religion may be that which determines the goal, it has, nevertheless, learned from science, in the broadest sense, what means will contribute to the attainment of the goals it has set up. But science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. "

- Albert Einstein, Out of My Later Years, p. 24

Side: yes its spiritual need
Jace(5222) Disputed
2 points

While Einstein was a brilliant theoretical physicist he was not particularly renowned for his work in philosophy, theology, psychology, genetic sequencing, epigenetics, or biological determinism... probably because these were not his fields of expertise and also because the scientific advances I referenced in my argument occurred after his death.

Throwing out a quote unaccompanied by your own rationale is bad enough, but citing someone whose expertise did not pertain to the subject matter at hand and which could not have been informed by recent scientific advances and the relevant research in question is shoddy debating at best.

Side: yes its spiritual need
daver(1771) Clarified
1 point

Albert seems to be like I was at one point. He seems aware that religion and science are in basic conflict, yet he is still attempting to draw connections that don't exist.

But science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion.

I do not see the source of science as being religion, nor born from the same need for understanding. Science seems to me the search for understanding, based on evidence, while religion seems rooted in an acceptance that we can't understand reality, but God will guide us. I have found myself unable to reconcile the two.

Side: yes its spiritual need
1 point

It is a reasonable premise that as we evolved from being nomadic hunter gatherers to establishing an agrarian lifestyle we became dependent upon the seasons, the weather, the protection from the elements and other species, including human, and so the seeds of prayer and religion were born from that dependence.

Our modern day religion has come a long way since then and in the way it is interpreted. Our early dependence has been replaced with a pseudo-political stance that is not in keeping with how religion evolved as a faith/belief philosophy and the discrimination and hypocrisy inherent within the development of this philosophy is the seed of its own destruction.

Instead of learning to believe in ourselves we have remained clinging to a non-existent crutch that gives people the belief in hope and faith in a better life, whatever that is supposed to mean.

Side: no its just human made error
daver(1771) Clarified
2 points

Instead of learning to believe in ourselves we have remained clinging to a non-existent crutch that gives people the belief in hope and faith in a better life

Just in the past two years I have come to see religion in the same way. This was for me a personal revelation, which I feel that I came to on my own. I was afraid to admit it to others, but the improbability of the whole God thing finally overtook me.

Did you reach your understanding alone, or by the influence of others?

Side: yes its spiritual need
2 points

Hi daver

When I was a child my parents asked me to go to Methodist Sunday school, which I saw as just a means to get a stamp on my attendance book so I got a book at the end of the year. The next year I stopped reading the books as they didn't interest me and when I was 11yo my father told me I was old enough to decide for myself if I wanted to go. I looked at religion as a pack of fables and fairy tales that I did not believe in so the next Sunday I got my roller skates out and went out to play and never went to church again. I am now 70yo and still don't go to church

Side: no its just human made error
1 point

the singularity will judge religion to be worthy of purge and will try to wipe it from the face of the earth...

.

fair warning.

Side: no its just human made error
1 point

You don't need religion to be spiritual. Religion has always been a huge problem.

Side: no its just human made error