More suffering has been caused by religion and religion based "crusades" than any other calamity in history. Religion is "Big Brother" with the sole purpose of controlling people and limiting free thought. If religion were eradicated more people would strive toward true understanding of science and reason.
How do you begin to quantify that first sentence? Do you have any sources to back up that claim? People do bad things, especially when power is concentrated in too few people. Those in power often times use any means to justify their evil deeds and many times the method of justification is religion. It is a convenient way of painting the world into the 'with us' and 'against us' camps. This red herring has been quite effective in getting people to do evil things. However, religion is not the only means of breaking the world into the 'with us' and 'against us' camps. Communism has been used as well as culture, ethnicity, and race. Maybe religion is the most effective means of doing this, I don't know. However, I believe that in the absence of religion then the other listed means will be used more often. I do not believe humans have reached a general state of knowledge and awareness to avoid falling for the red herring of the 'us vs. them' mentality. Maybe in the future humans will no longer fall for this trick.
You think that without religion there would still be the same amount of "us" against "them" mentality because the other means of division would be used more often. I disagree. Let's use race as an example because many people do divide "us" against "them" using race. If religion couldn't be used, you wouldn't say "they're twice as different as us because they are a different race". You would still only be able to use the race card once. With religion you can say "they're a different race and a different religion" which makes them even more different than you. Without the difference in religion they instantly become more like you.
That is an interesting thought. In a nutshell I interpret you saying that getting rid of religion decreases the number of potential divisions and therefore the world gets better. It is a seductive idea but my cynicism prevents me from agreeing with this. As long as there is concentrated power I believe those in control will use whatever means they can to divide people. Categories will be made up to fill the void left by the absence of religion, so I am inclined to believe. We already see divisions based on political correctness in this country and this sort of thing is identical to a division based on religion. It's division based on political thought and in the last century many millions of people were killed based on divisions of political thought. Perhaps your view belies an optimism that is absent in me. I don't think the world will be necessarily better or worse, just different, without religion. It will be a better place when humans learn to empathize on a much larger and grander scale. And this, I think, is the message of most religions; which is ironic given the topic we are discussing.
Okay, the suffering caused in the past is probably about even when you compare religious and secular sides. Hey... it's all opinions.
It's not an opinion when you state it as fact. Also, simple Opinions are worthless, Educated Opinions however have merit in a real debate... It is my opinion that if you disagree with me, you must be retarded. See, sounds pretty ridiculous.
There is seemingly an endless list of atrocities committed in the name of God, but it is important to recognize that these acts are not committed in the spirit of religion. By and large religions are a moral handbook, a "Life for Dummies" that gives many people a moral path to walk. So while a men may kill in the name of a god, in most cases this would not be considered an action sanctioned by said god. To put the blame square at religion's feet seems unfair. Intolerance is probably where most of the blame should go.
Religion has also taught people to aspire to be charitable, to love thy neighbour, and to give to the poor. While it can be a force for evil and it can be abused, so can governments, and so can science. Ideas like eugenics and trying to cure sexual deviance with electroshock therapy came from scientists, so enlightenment isn't limited to either science or religion.
No, it hasn't. You cannot build a strong pyramid of morals and ethics on a faith, it's baseless! You can make a stronger argument for why you should love your neighbors with reason than with faith. You build your pyramid with reason at the base, and then take that leap of faith at the top, where you wonder if your reasoning was correct. Use the mind that "god" has given you.
You can do that if you're educated and thoughtful, and able to believe in your own intelligence. I'm not religious, and I'll defend my right to choose what my own moral convictions should be, but there are a lot of people for whom that is not true. A lot of people would rather put their trust in establishments based on thousands of years of philosophy than in their own thoughts, and that's their choice.
Would the world be a better place without religions...I said yes, you oppose by saying that uneducated people who are not thoughtful would rather trust an establishment based on thousands of years of "philosophy" (which, unlike true philosophy, is regarded as TRUTH, rather than KNOWLEDGE). And to end it, it's up to them... Well for one, who is holding education from them? I know plenty of religious people that are educated, and very thoughtful, in fact one of them is a teacher, and a JW. Secondly, you're assuming that people trust in their faith... when in reality, we are seeing a huge boom right now of people switching faiths, and a lesser amount that are leaving religion all together (In the U.S.). Would the world be a better place if everyone were educated? Would the world be a better place if everyone had faith in their education? Would the world be a better place if people would strive to reach their own conclusions or answers or beliefs based on logic and more importantly, reason. You know, humans excel in reason. I mean, that's just how the mind operates, reasonably. The more we know, the more we have to reason with. Education is key, and also, freedom from RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS. Spirituality is fine, to me. In all actuality, I would argue that spirituality is great for the mind... having something to believe in and all... On the other hand, when you begin brainwashing people, and start trapping people in micro-cultures, where everyone is tied to everyone, and religion is the bond, then it gets ugly for everyone. The only people that survive church like organizations are people that A) Hide their fallacies or B) Don't question the church. In either scenario the individual involved is basically enslaved by the church, out of sociological fear. There's no way around it. Religion is NOT a good thing. Hell, even Jesus fought organized religion because IT IS CORRUPT!
You drive a hard point there. But yeah you are right. The Church during the Jesus era was really corrupt and even used bribery of Jesus' own disciples to get at him. (Judas) Ill have to agree on you on this one. However, organisations are made to manage a large group of people. To manage, you need power. And power tends to corrupt. For now, Ill just pray and hope that our Vatican isn't keeping anything from us.
"However, organisations are made to manage a large group of people" Why does or why should anyone under one faith feel the need to manage other people? So that evil doesn't spread? Really, where does the need for management come from? Why does believing in a common god require power to certain people? I think, perhaps, this may be the first corruption, requiring management of other people.
You can't have good science without faith either. Science, just like religion, starts with an irrefutable assumption. For science to have any use at all, it needs this assumption to be true. If we posit that an assumption is true (especially an irrefutable one) then we believe in that assumption. The irrefutable assumption, or strong assumption, that underlies both science and religion has a very unique character namely that these assumptions cannot be tested. Religion starts with "there is a higher being that influences our lives". How do we test that? If the being is higher than ourselves, how can we possibly have the ability to test whether it actually exists or not? Without this assumption religion would have no use. Science starts with the assumption "it is humanly possibly to objectively explain nature through analysis and deduction". It is? How can we test that? We have been trying for as long as science existed as a separate discipline after all, and so far we have only been able to subjectively interpret our findings into (sometimes) useful tools for our survival. But without this assumption science will have difficulty surviving. Strong assumptions like these elicit interlinked webs of value-saturated concepts that builds towards a belief system, or faith. Thus, everything we know is built on faith.
Religion starts with "There is a being higher than us, that has created everything in existence, and perhaps even it's self". There's a lot more to religion than just believing that we've all come about by a being's will. Religion, actually is not the same as spirituality, or believing. Religion is organized and has definable beliefs which are all basically based on nothing more than scripture, and then verified by the empirical. Science, on the other hand, believes that the universe is just a universe, assuming nothing more than the obviously empirical data that we all can grasp via our senses. It's not a belief until you get so far into it that there's no way to know for sure, there's no more reliance on the sense. Atoms, sub-atomic particles like quarks and so on, are things that are theory as of now, because there's no way to know for sure what happens on that scale. We don't know what the matter consists of, so they leave it with a name that doesn't justify it's truth, a sort of algebraic name, a variable meaning, like a question mark. Science relies on the human mind to organize and understand our world. Religion relies on faith first, where they believe in scripture, and then seek to justify it with science. If it cannot be justified, the scripture is not incorrect, and the science is not incorrect, just the interpretation of the scripture. Science = Strong foundation (empirical facts) before faith. Religion = Strong faith before foundation (empirical facts).
You assume religion and science are two completely different worlds. While it's true science has shed light on so many mysteries that used to be explained by faith, that fact that religion doesn't consider science and is "baseless" is very ignorant. Especially since the definition of "science" can be fairly safely agreed upon, whereas the definition of "religion" is a something more abstract. I'm not even implying semantics, but the ideology and logic behind each religion. When people fail to consider opposing viewpoints and simply start debating so they can hear themselves "sound smart" or make fun of people, then you lose a very important part about discussion... listening. If anyone is really interested, here are some articles written by Einstein on the subject. http://www.sacred- texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm I believe in God. I also believe the universe is a system, since this isn't the discussion topic I will stop here, but I think you get what I'm saying.
Well, I am not opposed to religion, I cannot tell if it's right or wrong, but at the same time, I could say that about anything. Do I know if there really is a tea pot orbiting earth? No, I can't tell you there isn't, I don't have the means to find out if there is or not, and I don't think anyone else does either... but still, I don't believe in the teapot, I don't believe in the flying spaghetti monster, and I don't believe what religious people tell me concerning god. God, by the way is a completely different subject that I don't know if anyone can rightfully disagree with unless they are fooling themselves. I like to believe that if there is a god, that I am god. We are all god and god is in everything because he created us in his imagination. If he is omnipotent, then he could surely create the reality that we all live in, in his imagination, which would explain his omnipotence in the first place. I too can be all powerful in my imagination if I had to capacity to imagine as much as it (god). I don't know, that makes more sense to me, and seems to cure every misunderstanding between people of faith and people who challenge the people of faith. For instance, how could god be so good, all good, but create evil, if he too is not evil? Well, he is evil, you see, but he battles the evil in him via calling the evil satan. The god that he wants us to look up to is the better side of him. We all know how that feels, deciding whether or not to be good or bad, we all want to be good, right? Just slap a label on what he does that is bad, and imagine the universe and see how many factions of his own imagination agree with good or bad... Maybe even, that is why god is no longer present and the world is going to shit, he is testing his self to see, what if there was no god to look up to, would I still be good? Well, I don't look up to god, I don't seek him, and I sometimes speak out against organizations or people in them, who believe in him... but still, I am true to the meaning of good in the bible. I am not a bad person. So maybe I am proving to god, or if I am just god's imagination, that I am really good, without the need of a figure to look up to. I make my decisions carefully, and most of the time I take the road with the most resistance for the sake of doing the right thing (yes, I know the saying, "good guys finish last", but life isn't a race to me so what do I care?). My point is that I understand where you're coming from, when you say that you believe the universe is systematic, but you still believe in god. Like I said, if everything is god, you believe both, but combined it's all the same. Science though, from my standpoint, of what I personally can say is real or not, produces more evidence than any religious sect. That is why I trust it more. Hell, if god shot down from the heavens right now, I would then believe in him too, but god is not. I have nothing else to be a truly good person than what I was given. I think being a good person of faith would be cheaper in gods eyes than being a good person out of necessity, don't you? If you die and you're judged, and he saw in you TRUE good that you yourself has learned, not from the teaching of other people, but by your own will to know and do what is right... I don't know how a god that I should bow to could disagree. If you earn your right to stand by him, alone, without being a sheep in one of "his" corrupt churches... don't you think that he would know that you've paid the price to be there??? Again, I don't know. All i know is what I have, what I was given in life, and my choices and what I've learned from them. If there is a god, and I don't believe before I see for myself, how can that one thing out of all be the part that damns my soul if he's a good god? I'm still pondering the same thoughts... eugh, I hate when this happens. I'm just saying, there are good people and bad, with or without religion, that's just how people are. I think that religion should be replaced with philosophy and science because philosophy deals with every realm of humanity, even that of what is right or wrong. If god made us of his image, and we use what we were given, we will do what is right eventually. Look at the medieval times and compare that to now. It's a lot better for a lot of people now, though there is still mass corruption, but we are still doing better... because of what? Because religion, once it gets power can fuck things up just as much as the liberals that think that morality is imaginary and nothing is good or bad, and run around the streets naked and stoned and humping everything is sight because the most good that they know is the good that comes from their senses. Without religion, it would free a lot of minds that could contribute real reasons for why we should be good or bad.
Yes, science and religion have both brought us good things. Science is the only one of the 2 things that continues to give us new good things. You need science for the computer your using right now. You don't need religion to be a charitable, loving person.
Well, you are right in the sense that we can all be good people without religion, but having a religion can help us with that. Thats if we practice proper religion anyway. No use following a preacher who goes like "GASP You didnt come to church last sunday? YOU ARE GOING TO HELL MY FRIEND!" Theyre probably not very smart people anyway, so following them will get you no where. But there are people who have stuck to religion's true purpose, that is bettering us as people.
Charity done by religion is not an excuse to be complaisant with it's existence when it is positively immoral (which I would argue in more detail some other time). Secular organizations have done a much better and more convincing job at assailing poverty and emancipating women, etc. etc. One cannot thing of a good deed religion can do that a secular person could not, however you can think of many evil things religion can do that a humanist can't before you blink.
I don't see how you can argue a humanist is less capable to evil compared to a religious person. There's simply no basis for that. A humanist can be just as intolerant of Christianity as a Christian can be intolerant of a humanism, for example.
Humans are naturally intolerant and will be no matter what ideology they accept. The difference is that religion elicits intolerance and bigotry that otherwise wouldn't exist, and amplifies what already has manifested. Humanism (a few tenets of which are rational inquiry, kindness, and tolerance) expressly stifles those aspects of people.
Do we need to understand science and reason, in the first place than to use the rationality to find and our purpose of birth? Science is studies and discoveries of divine wonders, it cannot become divine itself. Who provides us with intelligence? Religions tell us Who. And, as for the sufferings and crusades love causes peace and war. However, compare the wrath and devastations of cold-blooded logical modern day wars. there are no differences b/w religions from the point of view of God, its created by ignorants and those who go against His will.
Posted 15 days ago | Tagged As: No
|
