Each society kind of has their own definitions on what they consider acceptable and unacceptable. This includes hard laws, both secular and religious, as well as less strict but still important mores and folkways. Well, there are certainly lines that people cross sooner or later that cause people to categorize them as “bad.” How do you feel about the idea though, that the lines are blurry and seem to move about? I think you’re touching at the edges of how and why religions explain suffering and bad behavior and how we go about addressing it as people. Different religions have different explanations. To me, personally, I think the focus often seems negative just because the original questions, such as “Why do we suffer” and “Why do people do bad things,” have a negative connotation to begin with. The goal of psychology is to understand why people behave the way they do as individuals. The goal of psychiatry is to help us be healthy in regards to our psychological health. Many religions similarly encourage us to be strong, rightful people, both to ourselves and to others. This encouragement is found in many forms, from theology to parables to lectures to even prayer. I honestly think that one of the main roles of religion is to form social cohesion and it’s kind of difficult to have that if you don’t do your best to encourage people to be good to each other. Religion, our relationship with it, it’s relationship with us, and its relationship to the world is constantly evolving. It’s not a static thing in the slightest. Theology as we know and understand it today is different than theology as we know and understand it five hundred years ago and the further we go back in time, the further it changes. Look at Christianity, how old it is, yet people still look towards it to find inspiration to making the world a better place. You’re convoluting things. It’s important to understand how things work together, but it’s also important to segment things and see them individualistically. There are many bad actors in the religious world. But there are many bad actors in the world period. Because individuals or institutions have a religious base, it doesn’t mean religion is necessarily to blame for their behavior. Let me ask you this, if tomorrow war broke out between Russia and America, would you blame me because I’m an American? Would you blame my constitution? Would you blame my military? Would you blame my government? Would it be some of those mixed together with some blame layed more on some than others? How would you want me to answer those questions in reverse? Here’s a whole list of something new. You’ll have everything from stuff that expands on more traditional religions, such as The Abrahamic Faiths and Hinduism, to Neo-Paganism, to UFO cults. Some of that stuff is pretty mundane. Some of that stuff is pretty out there. Some of that stuff could be downright scary. If you check it out, you'll actually see the Baha'i Faith is on there. Want an open confession? Sometimes I wonder about trying to be a good Baha'i, because it is new, because the early days of The Faith did have a rough past, and because I worry that there's actually a bit of truth to the argument that the number of adherents a particular faith has lends to its legitimacy. This stuff isn't easy to figure out, many religious people go through periods of intense doubt, and there's a good chance many of us have things all wrong. In a way, that's okay, because that's part of life, that's part of being human, and the important thing we take away from all of this is that it's important to try and be good people, to ourselves and to each other.Depends on your definition of "dick".
There seems to be no natural, objective line whereupon crossing which you'd be considered universally evil.
That's a good way to think of it. The problem, I believe, is how religions portray our flawedness.
I feel like the difference between psychology and religion is that psychology acknowledges and teaches us to be better.
It doesn't seem possible for religion to turn this aspect of itself around any time soon, if at all: there's too much baggage. I'm even going to say that there's too much trash: holding onto old, antiquated ideas, making no apology for the things the church as an entity made or allowed to be (as Stephen Fry so eloquently put) and continuing preaching the same old story that existed for millenia where the rest of the world has made moral, psychological and otherwise scientific discoveries about ourselves and other people.
I don't religion is up for the task as it is. Not with the constant news of how the church hides and protects their child abusers from justice. Not with the way priests drive expensive cars when their believes advice them to abstain from excessive luxury.
At the very least, I believe a fundamental restructuring would be required. At that point, it would be almost easier to simply invent something new.