What primitive social dependency will humanity dispose of first?
Religion
Side Score: 15
|
 |
Government
Side Score: 17
|
|
|
|
|
3
points
1
point
"I can see it leaving long before government." Why? According to "adherents.com", there are approximately 1.1 billion non-religious people in the world. That leaves roughly 6 billion religious people. Keep in mind that most religions are sustainable, yet a government isn't necessarily. How could it possibly "leave" before government, which could exit at any time? Side: government
Your premise is counter to reality. Social dependency is a result of evolution from primitive. Dependency exists with or without a means to satisfy a society's needs and individuals within that society. Meeting these needs improves quality of life for the whole making possible advancement. Tearing down our socially shared means of advancement, government, does not eliminate need, it increases pain and suffering and makes advancement far more difficult individually and as a society. Ignoring it is impossible for humanity to function without government, even if it were possible to get rid of government, it would be a fucking stupid idea. That said, I'm over here. Side: Religion
1
point
Actually, the premise of primitive social dependency is correct and pertinent to reality. Religion and government have been around since the dawn of civilization, and evolution of humanity will slowly release the shackles of tyranny, and bring new humanity into beliefs and ideas such as more free markets and minds. Side: government
2
points
Without government, there would be little order, confusion everywhere. People would have to rely on morals and because that differs determining your upbringing and intellectual stablility, many would fall prey to those stronger and more ruthless. Government provides a line we can cross, but with it occompanies consequences. Religion is really just belief i the unseen so therefore I consider it blind faith. Side: Religion
1
point
What do you think of the idea that a world without government being stable depends more on economics than on morals? I dislike libertarian ideology because their ideal world is too dependent on "moral" actions taking place, rather than a system grounded in material incentives and disincentives. Is it possible the right economy could preform many of the same roles of government, or rather is it possible that many government actions and institutions exist to compensate where the current economic system fails? Side: Religion
1
point
|
Both always follow humanity. I do not think they has been a moment in humanity were they has been no hierarchy or religion. They is a saying in Russia that they will always be something in the place of religion. An example is communist Russia trying to dissipate religion, it immediately replaced the spot of religion bringing with it its own holidays and its own almost Religious clubs and organizations. So something will always take the place of religion.People will always have something in that spot what they worship or believe in .If the government grows stronger the Religion may grow weaker and vice verser ,unless the government is a theocracy. Overall Religion can go hand in hand with government and be parallel at the same time. -----sorry Didn't spell check Side: government
2
points
1
point
Both are based on false beliefs, but Government seems far easier to just take down. There are politicians you can kill or institutions you can burn down. However, like religion, government is a lot based on ideas which are, as V said, bulletproof. With religion, all it takes is belief. With government, it takes a few more steps, like agreement and, at times, coercion. Side: government
1
point
Just as a point, in some cases early government is Religion almost all of the earliest civilizations were formed on the basis that the government was essentially a region. An example is the Egyptians believing the pharaohs were god similar with the completely parallel Aztecs. In fact all Kings and Queens of Europe claimed to have divine the divine right to rule as they were chosen by God.----Just thought I might add this in. Side: government
1
point
Religion is a broad term, in its most general sense it refers to healthy common forms of ritualization that are unlikely to ever go away. Its narrower definitions will disappear rather soon, as people become more distrustful of organized religion due to fundamental contradictions between arising youth culture and traditional values. However, religion is more embedded into our culture than government is and has a deeper root in the minds of people. Religion is second only to money in how much it affects the frame work of people's world views. This means that as absolute wealth increases world wide, technology improves, and current protests carry out their intent, there should be more direct empowerment of people such that they have more legitimate control over their lives. This should significantly reduce the need of government, weakling its position as an essential element of societies even further. Side: government
|
