Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical

[Value Collector]

Society has been evolving due to the influence of many factors including religion. You can't just take any of these factors out of the equation and say that society would have been better or worse without this factor. These factors exist as fact and can't be erased.

The religious folk here are pointing at religion as the main reason, I am just pointing out that it's not the religions that have been the driving force, in fact the core religious texts go against all the things that make society free, eg the bible does not support freedom of religion, but most of us here do, and a society that doesn't support religious freedoms can't really be a free society.

Hence these core values that modern society are based on, can not be from the core religious values, to the point that some of these values have been adopted by modern religions, it's because their members have brought in outside secular ideas and modernised these older religions, so we can not give the older religion credit.

As I explained to you, the idea of not killing other members of your group was not created by the author of the ten commandments, it actually existed long before, it's a taboo that evolved early on in social groups and exists across cultures and species.

Giving the ten commandments credit for a rule that developed independently in many cultures and species is just silly, Yes the rule was adopted by the author of the ten commandments, but it's a naturally occurring taboo, that developed through evolution.

 

[Knobby22]

Charity is a Christian construct that had done great service to humanity.
St Vinny's, Salvo's Mercy hospitals etc.

 

[SirRumpole]

The religious folk here are pointing at religion as the main reason, I am just pointing out that it's not the religions that have been the driving force, in fact the core religious texts go against all the things that make society free, eg the bible does not support freedom of religion, but most of us here do, and a society that doesn't support religious freedoms can't really be a free society.

Hence these core values that modern society are based on, can not be from the core religious values, to the point that some of these values have been adopted by modern religions, it's because their members have brought in outside secular ideas and modernised these older religions, so we can not give the older religion credit.

As I explained to you, the idea of not killing other members of your group was not created by the author of the ten commandments, it actually existed long before, it's a taboo that evolved early on in social groups and exists across cultures and species.

Giving the ten commandments credit for a rule that developed independently in many cultures and species is just silly, Yes the rule was adopted by the author of the ten commandments, but it's a naturally occurring taboo, that developed through evolution.

Some of the people you quote; eg the ancient Egyptians were religious in the sense that they believed in Gods and an afterlife. So religious thinking influenced the rules that they created for themselves. The ancient Greeks had their Gods so did the Romans.

Can you name any totally agnostic/atheist societies that independently developed laws similar or superior to what we have today ?

 

[Value Collector]

Charity is a Christian construct that had done great service to humanity.
St Vinny's, Salvo's Mercy hospitals etc.

There was charity before Christians. Cultures the world over assist others, even in the animal kingdom there are examples of animals helping others in their social group.

Even the urge to assist others is a product of evolution.

 

[Value Collector]

Some of the people you quote; eg the ancient Egyptians were religious in the sense that they believed in Gods and an afterlife. So religious thinking influenced the rules that they created for themselves. The ancient Greeks had their Gods so did the Romans.

Yes, but Tink is not saying religion in general help form societies as we see them now, she is specifically pointing out some things she thinks are good and saying they only formed due to the Christian faith, I am saying this is un true. The good things people point out are mostly human traits that have evolved independently, and in a lot of cases have been slowed in development because of the religions wanting to revert back to old ways, or atleast not change.

Can you name any totally agnostic/atheist societies that independently developed laws similar or superior to what we have today ?

Most of the laws we have today are superior to the biblical laws, and they are from a society that has become more secular.

eg. The laws that protect religious freedom are superior to the biblical laws that command non believers to be stoned.

It's because society has over time become increasingly secular that these new superior laws exist

 

[luutzu]

Some of the people you quote; eg the ancient Egyptians were religious in the sense that they believed in Gods and an afterlife. So religious thinking influenced the rules that they created for themselves. The ancient Greeks had their Gods so did the Romans.

Can you name any totally agnostic/atheist societies that independently developed laws similar or superior to what we have today ?

Confucianism and Taoism.

Well, Lao Tzu's Taoism was agnostic/anti-theistic then evolved into a bunch of gods and what not. But the Tao Te Ching is one of humanity's wisest, most insightful book ever written - and it's not me saying that, some smart White guy did (Carl Jung or Bertrand Russell from memory).

Confucius and Confucianism teaches the moral code and does what religion the world over tries to do without the god and fairy tale stuff. Despite the bad rap during Mao's great leap forward, Confucian teachings influenced the entire Chinese empire and all its colonies and vassals for a couple thousand years - it still does today.

If you ask me, these two are by far more superior to Western Christian bible and other religious texts - It is because it not only teaches independent thought, ways of thinking and examining life, but also morality and righteous code of conduct - all without threats of eternal condemnation and sins and eternal life for followers.

Just because the year starts with Christ doesn't mean history and wisdom began there too.

 

[bellenuit]

Can you name any totally agnostic/atheist societies that independently developed laws similar or superior to what we have today ?

Can you name any totally agnostic/atheist societies? There may be state mandated anti-theism, but that doesn't imply the society is that way.

The tone of your question seems to be implying that the corollary is true, namely that moral and ethical standards that evolved in societies that are not totally agnostic/atheist came from the non-agnostic/atheist members only. That is patently false as any reading of history will usually show that it if often the latter that are the last to embrace what we now regard as accepted morality/ethics.

Our morality is primarily driven by empathy with our fellow human beings, not by texts from some ancient scripts. Empathy is something we all as humans share, be one religious or non-religious. Unfortunately, the religious often let their dogma override what they otherwise would not do if driven solely by empathy.

 

[bellenuit]

The Hierarchy of Religious Beliefs



http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/06/20/the-hierarchy-of-religious-beliefs/

 

[Tisme]

The Hierarchy of Religious Beliefs

View attachment 63108

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/06/20/the-hierarchy-of-religious-beliefs/

I like that, but is there a place for basement dwellers like me?

 

[Value Collector]

I like that, but is there a place for basement dwellers like me?

From your opinions you have expressed I would have thought you fit nicely into the second from the bottom.


But anyway. I asked the below question earlier, just wondering if you could answer it.

Knowing the contents of the old testament, how could you make the earlier claim that it was common sense ideals and freedoms?

 

[Tisme]

From your opinions you have expressed I would have thought you fit nicely into the second from the bottom.

Here we go again.

So what was that you were saying about social cohesion coming naturally and evolving as society progresses ...it's just common sense right? Does insulting people count as cementing relationships? Perhaps a dose of religious instruction wouldn't do you any harm.

Of course we all knew why you latched onto the evolution of community concept because it fits nicely with your agenda to mainstream homosexuality and disrupt the evolutionary progression of hetrosexuality doesn't it.

 

[Tisme]

Knowing the contents of the old testament, how could you make the earlier claim that it was common sense ideals and freedoms?

Why bother, you are just picking a fight because you think you are smarter than anyone else.

 

[SirRumpole]

The tone of your question seems to be implying that the corollary is true, namely that moral and ethical standards that evolved in societies that are not totally agnostic/atheist came from the non-agnostic/atheist members only. That is patently false as any reading of history will usually show that it if often the latter that are the last to embrace what we now regard as accepted morality/ethics.

I didn't say that at all, and you missed my point even though I stated it clearly. Society evolves due to many influences, one of them being religion. Some people are trying to say as a fact that if religion was never "invented" we would have a superior society than what we have now. This is impossible to prove one way or the other, because most if not all societies had some sort of religious influence on their moral/legal systems.

 

[SirRumpole]

Confucianism and Taoism.

Well, Lao Tzu's Taoism was agnostic/anti-theistic then evolved into a bunch of gods and what not. But the Tao Te Ching is one of humanity's wisest, most insightful book ever written - and it's not me saying that, some smart White guy did (Carl Jung or Bertrand Russell from memory).

Confucius and Confucianism teaches the moral code and does what religion the world over tries to do without the god and fairy tale stuff. Despite the bad rap during Mao's great leap forward, Confucian teachings influenced the entire Chinese empire and all its colonies and vassals for a couple thousand years - it still does today.

If you ask me, these two are by far more superior to Western Christian bible and other religious texts - It is because it not only teaches independent thought, ways of thinking and examining life, but also morality and righteous code of conduct - all without threats of eternal condemnation and sins and eternal life for followers.

Just because the year starts with Christ doesn't mean history and wisdom began there too.

And look at the Chinese society today. Almost totally amoral, will cheat people wherever they can, will invade other countries like Tibet where they don't belong, have very little regard for other cultures or other people's rights.

If you are proposing China as a beacon of non religious morality, then I think you are on the wrong horse.

 

[luutzu]

And look at the Chinese society today. Almost totally amoral, will cheat people wherever they can, will invade other countries like Tibet where they don't belong, have very little regard for other cultures or other people's rights.

If you are proposing China as a beacon of non religious morality, then I think you are on the wrong horse.

They got that from Communist totalitarianism, so they're influenced by the West and its debauchery, haha.
Vietnam is also stuffed, and they're also Communists.

I think the populace, in general, are much more moderate and moral than politicians and the political elite. It's strange but for some reason most ordinarily decent people become psychotic when they take power. It's not that power corrupts, it does that too I think, but for some reason they think that doing amoral, dastardly things (generally to other people) serves their people and the national interests.

Don't know whether that's just real politik or just an excuse for their psycho self to come out, but yea.

---

While we're on the who and what's first thing... Democracy isn't a Western or Christian thing either. I've read a couple essays and works for ancient Chinese scholars who teaches democratic values and putting the people first as the best way to govern.

Take Confucius, because he's quotable... Those who give to the people gain the people; those who gain the people gain the world.

There's at least two other sources that teaches along similar line. Just the Emperors and the warlords of China were too powerful, unlike King John who's being abused by the Nobility, it didn't catch on.

So while we in the West think we're the foundation of democracy and all that... democracy isn't just about letting people turning up to vote (people actually do vote for candidates in VN and China too, apparently)... but it's about benefiting the populace.

We are slowly seeing how that is eroding and the upper crust have way too much influence and power and wealth and benefits of society aren't reaching enough people...

anyway, back to work.

 

[bellenuit]

The interesting thing about the pyramid is that at the outset most followers of the Abrahamic religions would have probably sat at the top of the pyramid. For example, if you take Numbers 31:7-18, we read:

7 They fought against Midian, as the Lord commanded Moses, and killed every man. 8 Among their victims were Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur and Reba””the five kings of Midian. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. 9 The Israelites captured the Midianite women and children and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. 10 They burned all the towns where the Midianites had settled, as well as all their camps. 11 They took all the plunder and spoils, including the people and animals, 12 and brought the captives, spoils and plunder to Moses and Eleazar the priest and the Israelite assembly at their camp on the plains of Moab, by the Jordan across from Jericho.

13 Moses, Eleazar the priest and all the leaders of the community went to meet them outside the camp. 14 Moses was angry with the officers of the army””the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds””who returned from the battle.

15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

This is comparable to if not more barbaric than the actions of ISIS that we read about daily.

Over the centuries, the mainstream followers of the Abrahamic religions have moved down the pyramid to the 2nd level up, though there are minor sects within Christianity and Judaism that are still higher up the pyramid and significant numbers of the Islamic faith that still have not gotten below the third level.

This downward trend had been mainly due to the influence of secular and scientific thinking, not just from secular people but from religious people as well. The changes haven't come from within religion in the sense of alterations to the dogma, with the exception of the New Testament that forms the basis of Christianity as we know it today (with still a lot of reverence to the Old Testament), but from education that forced rational people (religious too) to conclude that much of the dogma had to be rubbish. So the dogma hasn't altered much over the centuries, just parts of it are no longer emphasised and is mainly glossed over.

Although the religious institutions can be credited with promoting education for long periods of their history, it is the ideas acquired through the outside influences that education exposes people to that in turn provided the moderating effect on religion.

 

[Tink]

VC, I don't appreciate you saying Tink said, Tink said.
They know perfectly well what I wrote, and I don't need you to speak for me, thanks.

I put up the Magna Carta and mentioned about our Laws and Legal system, but you can't accept the truth of where we came from.
You twist and turn things to suit yourself, but I was stating FACTS, even if you don't want to hear them.

Thanks, Tisme, you are spot on with what I said about our history.

 

[Value Collector]

VC, I don't appreciate you saying Tink said, Tink said.
They know perfectly well what I wrote, and I don't need you to speak for me, thanks.

I put up the Magna Carta and mentioned about our Laws and Legal system, but you can't accept the truth of where we came from.
You twist and turn things to suit yourself, but I was stating FACTS, even if you don't want to hear them.

Thanks, Tisme, you are spot on with what I said about our history.

if I am responding to something you said, and then a second person comments back to me, but they don't seem to get what I am saying, I will clarify my comment by stating what you have said.

You still haven't responded to my point I made saying that at the time of the Magna carter, the church was still burning witches and heathens, and sentencing people to death or torture for blasphemy, I think it is you that has the selective view of history, you try and paint the Christian faith as a shining light of personal freedoms, which it clearly was not.

After the magma carter was written, your brand of Christian faith was still involved in executions of non Christians for another few hundred years

 

[Value Collector]

Of course we all knew why you latched onto the evolution of community concept because it fits nicely with your agenda to mainstream homosexuality and disrupt the evolutionary progression of hetrosexuality doesn't it.

You have lost me there, I have no idea what you mean by that.


in regards to me asking you to explain your position on the Old Testament, I am not picking a fight, I am genuinely interested in why you think it is a source of good morals when so much of its content is demonstratably immoral.

 

[Tink]

Yes, but Tink is not saying religion in general help form societies as we see them now,

Rumpole was right, you were wrong, VC.

So next time just answer their questions rather than, Tink said.