Why Religion?

[MS+Tradesim]

So on topic...why religion?

Post inception, there are probably as many reasons as there are believers in the different religions. Some are born into one, indoctrinated and never question. Some are cultural 'believers' who belong to a certain religion in the same way that they belong to a certain society or country - it's just part of their life, not deeply held but providing some social or psychological value. Others are raised with one religion or no religion and have an experience or journey which they interpret in a way that causes them to brace another religion. Some question long held beliefs and actually embrace a different religion for intellectual reasons. Some are raised in a religion and life experiences force them to confront their beliefs - they might reject all religion, or construct a new belief system that helps them to better cope with the existential crisis, or they might come to a new deeply understood grasp and appreciation of their own religion. Some will use religion in their lust for control and power. No question. But that type of person is just as likely to be found in any ideology, including the secular.

But why did they begin? This is unanswerable outside of structural beliefs, or top-level presuppositions. A person who denies the supernatural is forced, prior to the fact, to reject any theory of religious origin which invokes a non-material source. Religion in this view cannot be anything other than a process-derived artifact of human development.

But if there is a supernatural entity interacting with this universe then religious belief may be inevitable. It would be as natural a desire to search for something higher as it would to look for food to satisfy hunger.

 

[darkside]

The whole speaking in tongues is interesting, I remember attending a fundamentalist church, and they invited people up to speak in tongues, and first time I went to this 'fundamentalist' church, I was 17, and just went up and curious, obviously not part of the 'group', I literally just went 'blar blar blar', and just got odd looks, because I wasn't part of the 'group'.

As mentioned, I am a practicing Catholic, and have fortunately have some intelligent priests as friends, that also have a 'wicked' sense of humor, but are also the most selflish people you could meet, one told me of going to a 'charismatic' meeting of the following, and just didn't get it, the speaking in tongues.

It has been mentioned as a gift, but not one that should be 'forced'.

And what a wonderfull gift that would be , can you imagine how great a world it would be with a more "jibberish " speaking world , thats just what we need, and to do that to you at age 17, well thats almost child abuse , and remember "the family that prays together is brainwashing their kids" now wheres my "Astra" with custom roof racks !!!

 

[weird]

And what a wonderfull gift that would be , can you imagine how great a world it would be with a more "jibberish " speaking world , thats just what we need, and to do that to you at age 17, well thats almost child abuse , and remember "the family that prays together is brainwashing their kids" now wheres my "Astra" with custom roof racks !!!

lol, no did that stint on my own, just a curious lad, no family involved there.

Just an experimental youth. Mind u how quickly we age, that was 20 years ago !

 

[Sean K]

So on topic...why religion?

Post inception, there are probably as many reasons as there are believers in the different religions. Some are born into one, indoctrinated and never question. Some are cultural 'believers' who belong to a certain religion in the same way that they belong to a certain society or country - it's just part of their life, not deeply held but providing some social or psychological value. Others are raised with one religion or no religion and have an experience or journey which they interpret in a way that causes them to brace another religion. Some question long held beliefs and actually embrace a different religion for intellectual reasons. Some are raised in a religion and life experiences force them to confront their beliefs - they might reject all religion, or construct a new belief system that helps them to better cope with the existential crisis, or they might come to a new deeply understood grasp and appreciation of their own religion. Some will use religion in their lust for control and power. No question. But that type of person is just as likely to be found in any ideology, including the secular.

But why did they begin? This is unanswerable outside of structural beliefs, or top-level presuppositions. A person who denies the supernatural is forced, prior to the fact, to reject any theory of religious origin which invokes a non-material source. Religion in this view cannot be anything other than a process-derived artifact of human development.

But if there is a supernatural entity interacting with this universe then religious belief may be inevitable. It would be as natural a desire to search for something higher as it would to look for food to satisfy hunger.

Yes, this was going off topic, but not unexpected.

So, to summarise a couple of reasons for religion here:

Cultural and social indoctination/framework.
To cope with existential crisis.
A process-derived artifact of human development. (might need to expand on this MS&T)
There is/are supernatural entities interacting within this universe.
A natural desire to search for something higher. (do you mean this to be related to the point directly proceeding?)

 

[weird]

Yes, this was going off topic, but not unexpected.

So, to summarise a couple of reasons for religion here:

Cultural and social indoctination/framework.
To cope with existential crisis.
A process-derived artifact of human development. (might need to expand on this MS&T)
There is/are supernatural entities interacting within this universe.
A natural desire to search for something higher. (do you mean this to be related to the point directly proceeding?)

Disagree,

Religion is more looking at something structured as opposed to new fad/unstructured, not been tested as having fundamental principles, and also having principles as opposed to being some animal which is just self-serving, and fundamentally acknowledging ... we don't know ****.

 

[beamstas]

"Ignorance is bliss"


People say they don't like religious folk preaching to them, so why do atheist feel they have to preach their belief?

I don't think the issue here is religous people. 99% are regular people who are just the same as everyone else. No religious person is better than a non-religous person. We are all made of the same stuff, we all think the same thoughts (or similar), There are no differences.

The small majority of religous people make a bad name for everyone

Maybe we could change the topic to "Why Blacks?"

Im not being racst here. Black people could be attributed to gang related murders all across the u.s. Im sure only a small percentage of black people are bad people too, but that small percentage of people gives a bad name for the rest of them.


It is not the stereotype you fall under that determines whether you are a good person or not. Athiest, Christian, Catholic, Whatever you are, each type of religion (yes athiesm is a religion too.. a set of beliefs you hold about something) will have bad people and good people. Religous people may sit back and think that all non-believers are bad people too. Im sure all you people out there who don't believe in anything would be thinking that they are good people. They probably are!

I think if you want to look at this topic you need to push through the arrogance and ignorance. Each "set" of people, no matter how you label them, will have good people and bad people.

Don't give the majority a bad name because of the actions of a minority.

All people are created equal, and i don't care what you try and tell me otherwise. I don't care if you are religous or not, in my eyes you are still a human being who is prone to the same human nature as the next person.

Brad

 

[Sean K]

Disagree,

Religion is more looking at something structured as opposed to new fad/unstructured, not been tested as having fundamental principles, and also having principles as opposed to being some animal which is just self-serving, and fundamentally acknowledging ... we don't know ****.

Which of MS&T's points do you disagree with?

 

[Sean K]

"Ignorance is bliss"


People say they don't like religious folk preaching to them, so why do atheist feel they have to preach their belief?

.....

Brad

Brad, what's your point regarding why do we have religion? I've missed it in there. 'Human nature' perhaps. Or, is that just a general comment on previous chatter?

 

[MS+Tradesim]

A process-derived artifact of human development. (might need to expand on this MS&T)

If there is no god (or gods), then religion must be a product or adapation of evolution or some other complex process in nature. However, if there is a god (of some kind), a person who rejects the supernatural prior to the fact, will be forced to conclude that religion is nothing more than some kind of evolutionary development.

There has been some fascinating movement in ethnography along these lines. The standard position of western academia is that of methodological naturalism (MN), or the presupposition of an atheistic universe. Ethnographers, like other social scientists, are trained to assess everything on the basis that it all must have a natural explanation. But a number of them, due to their experiences with non-western societies, have rejected this presupposition and exposed it for what it is - a kind of cultural imperialism, the belief that all other societies and worldviews are subject to and assessable by MN.

There is/are supernatural entities interacting within this universe.
A natural desire to search for something higher. (do you mean this to be related to the point directly proceeding?)

Yes. The second point might flow naturally from the first. If there is an interactive god, humans are religious because they were designed to look for something (or someone) beyond themselves.

 

[darkside]

Beamstas, well said and some good points , but just to clarify my stand I see so many religionists rant and rave about how Atheists are “not tolerant of believers and have no respect for their faith”. To non believers this claim is absurd. For intolerance of various religions is the foundation of Judaism, Christianity, Muslim and many other orthodox communities. Matter of fact, the Bible and Pentateuch commands religious intolerance in MANY verses, even to the point of KILLING people for their beliefs.

 

[beamstas]

Brad, what's your point regarding why do we have religion? I've missed it in there. 'Human nature' perhaps. Or, is that just a general comment on previous chatter?

Just a comment regarding previous chatter

Here is a quote that i think people may find of interest -

"Or how can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye?"

 

[Julia]

Well, it never fails, does it! If you want to stir up the masses, just start a thread on religion.

Lots of people do the right thing because it's the right thing to do - god doesn't come into it.

I'm a practicing Catholic, why religion ? ... for anyone practicing any religion you will get many answers, one for myself that comes to mind is that it centers me, and also helps me see the best in humanity and appreciate nature, and also understand my flaws, and try to better myself.

Fair enough, weird. But it's entirely possible for human beings to do all that you have suggested above with no adherence to religion whatever.

Animal drive for the survival of oneself to procreate or perhaps the survival for the entire community, why is any variation of this broken ?

Some broken circuity with the structured but genetic soup which will self-correct ?

Random or drug influenced deviation of basic nature ?

Perhaps those not bound by religion, feel perhaps some comfort that others are, due to their predictable behaviour.

Because their own belief's outside of religion means that they are driven by chaos and unstructured self-discovery, with no need of remorse. And how do they try to apply their own belief on others, when their own is based on their limited exposure to things, and why do they try to judge others ?

Heavens, weird, what happened between your earlier post and this one?
Any chance of a translation?

Jeesus!! Starting to get a bit lost here Weird. Forget points 1-3 but could you please expand on 4-5 with some example/s to quantify exactly what you're getting at. I'm starting to think that maybe I have lost my way and need salvation. I mean the Bible has an answer for everything doesn't it?

eg: Life without religion = "belief driven by chaos and unstructured self-discovery"

I see how you misunderstood my post.
I did not mean to indicate a correlation between epilepsy and schizophrenia, instead I was stating that in my experience there is a much higher correlation between being very religious and schizophrenia.

Before anyone takes offense I am not inferring that you have to be crazy to believe in god

I remember an interesting conversation with a forensically detained schizophrenic who was convinced he was Jesus Christ. That was clearly a delusion rather than a correlation between schizophrenia and religion.

What evidence do you have for this? I'm not saying it's not true, just that I've never heard of it. Are you suggesting a causal relationship from one or the other? If so how is this postulated to work?

 

[Sean K]

Well, it never fails, does it! If you want to stir up the masses, just start a thread on religion.

Yes, Julia, always seems to work. I was getting a bit bored just sitting on the beach reading books all day..

 

[beamstas]

Beamstas, well said and some good points , but just to clarify my stand I see so many religionists rant and rave about how Atheists are “not tolerant of believers and have no respect for their faith”. To non believers this claim is absurd. For intolerance of various religions is the foundation of Judaism, Christianity, Muslim and many other orthodox communities. Matter of fact, the Bible and Pentateuch commands religious intolerance in MANY verses, even to the point of KILLING people for their beliefs.

Let's not turn this into a debate

But just let me point out one piece of history that you may find interesting.

Many religous people were killed throughout history if they were even found in possesion of a bible, or a single book of the bible.

As you can see, things go both ways again.

That is why i posted this

"Or how can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye?"

I don't care what religion you are (or none at all), you can't go around looking for a speck of sawdust in some one else's eye when you have a log coming out of your own eye. Im sure everyone can grasp why i have quoted this. I could sit here all night picking holes every religous, atheists and whatever else'ists views, But i won't, because then i'll be finding a speck of sawdust in someone elses eye when i have a log coming out of mine.

Im not going to lean to one side or the other here. I am nuetral in this topic and will remain that way. I am simply trying to point out that both sides can sit here basically forever and point the finger at each other, and never really work anything out. I don't want anything to do with that.

Cheers
Brad

 

[weird]

Always love your posts Julia, you are a logical, pacifying and lovely force ... one I would never want to recon with, unless you tell me what bottle to bring over first, again we may leave to agree and disagree but still remain as friends ... cool person.

 

[Julia]

Yes, Julia, always seems to work. I was getting a bit bored just sitting on the beach reading books all day..

I considered asking whether you were experiencing a period of existential angst, Kennas, so am relieved to know it's merely boredom.
When we return to the theme of "Why Homosexuality" I might reconsider.

 

[Sean K]

I found this article some time ago and found it quite interesting. Takes a little while to get into it, but worth a read.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/04/m...d=1&adxnnlx=1198041076-kbd5/ mI61KP62dWEBFr6Q

 

[darkside]

Let's not turn this into a debate

But just let me point out one piece of history that you may find interesting.

Many religous people were killed throughout history if they were even found in possesion of a bible, or a single book of the bible.

As you can see, things go both ways again.

That is why i posted this

"Or how can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye?"

I don't care what religion you are (or none at all), you can't go around looking for a speck of sawdust in some one else's eye when you have a log coming out of your own eye. Im sure everyone can grasp why i have quoted this. I could sit here all night picking holes every religous, atheists and whatever else'ists views, But i won't, because then i'll be finding a speck of sawdust in someone elses eye when i have a log coming out of mine.

Im not going to lean to one side or the other here. I am nuetral in this topic and will remain that way. I am simply trying to point out that both sides can sit here basically forever and point the finger at each other, and never really work anything out. I don't want anything to do with that.

Cheers
Brad

Brad, your historical facts serve you correct, Christians were killed for their beliefs, but not by Atheists, but once again more religious Zealots who did not share their beliefs, but held to the fact that they must kill anyone that did not pray to their “gods” , mind you, martyrdom was quite popular back then as it promised a way better afterlife

 

[Tink]

well said Beamstas, they are called extremists - be it religious, political...same deal..

 

[MS+Tradesim]

Brad, your historical facts serve you correct, Christians were killed for their beliefs, but not by Atheists, but once again more religious Zealots who did not share their beliefs, but held to the fact that they must kill anyone that did not pray to their “gods” ,

RUDOLPH J. RUMMEL, b, 1932, BA and MA from the University of Hawaii (1959, 1961); Ph.D. in Political Science (Northwestern University, 1963);Taught at Indiana University (1963), Yale (1964-66), University of Hawaii (1966-1995); now Professor Emeritus of Political Science, University of Hawaii.

Rummel has spent years working on the democide project and as a side-effect of his research, it can be reasonably demonstrated that the popular myth of religious destructiveness is just that, a popular myth. Secular states in the 20th century make any religious inspired efforts at destruction look like child's play.

Attached pics from Rummel's site - simple summaries of his documented work on the site.

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/welcome.html

Kennas, your article was an interesting read.