Finally, no 140 character limit. The best way I think I can put it is this. People were already trying to learn about the universe, they studied the stars and tried to find the meaning behind it all. The issue is that when organised religions such as the catholic church caught wind of this and when it disagreed with their teachings they had these people killed or tortured. They stopped people from findings things out because they knew there would be conflictions with their religious beliefs. This held back many areas of science for hundreds of years. I couldn't begin to imagine where we would be as a society right now if this hadn't happened. It's for these reasons that I think religion has been a burden on the human race and not a help. I know most, pretty much all, religions started out as people trying to find answers to life's big questions. I get that, I want answers too. But we're no closer to finding conclusive answers to these questions than we were thousands of years ago and as a result we've been held back hugely. People began to use religion as a tool to exercise their bigotry and persecute those who held different values than they did. This is still prevalent today in many places. Even very modern countries such as America change their laws and ways of governing society because of religion. Because of incidents such as the attack on the WTC, Muslims in America are treated by many people as if they are devil spawn. This divide in people is caused by their religious beliefs. It is my firm belief that most genocides that have occurred throughout history would have been easily avoided but for one group of people having different beliefs than another. I know this is unavoidable, people come to different conclusions about why they are here but there is no reason for them to fight and kill because of it. I believe that any possible benefits given by religion are far outweighed by the thousands of years of suffering they have caused.
I tend to agree with you. From my experience, the greatest thing that religion brings to the table is fellowship and organization. Organized fellowship, the gathering of people to coalesce around a common idea, philosophy etc. is a powerful thing. Could this exist without religion? Absolutely. Would people still be able to do great things, help their fellow man etc. without religion? Absolutely. Therefore, in my opinion organized religion cannot justify the amount of atrocities that have occurred in its name with the good that has stemmed from it. That said, I am of the opinion that spirituality and moreover the quest to answer certain questions that fall in the spiritual realm are incredibly important to society and the individual. In fact, I would love to see a world that embraced the ideals of Jesus Christ without having to create a religion out of it. The next Hubski podcast asks the question what is the difference between spirituality and religion? I'm almost done with it and look forward to yours and others' thoughts on what it has to say.I believe that any possible benefits given by religion are far outweighed by the thousands of years of suffering they have caused.
Maybe with less sense of right-and-wrong, governments would have never formed and the human race would be seperated, fighting eachother to stay alive more than researching into more inportant matters like how to deal with hunger etc. I'm making a lot of assumptions here. I think It would help to know how the first goverments formed to see if Religion played much of a part.Therefore, in my opinion organized religion cannot justify the amount of atrocities that have occurred in its name with the good that has stemmed from it.
Lots of of atrocities have occurred in the name of religion, but would a world without religion have neccessarily seen less? I think the idea of a afterlife and gods overwatching us gave people moral, told them what's right and wrong etc.
Without the fear of gods punishing them, would people still have conformed and helped and done the "right thing" by their religous standards?
Conversely though, I think many of the good things that came from religion would have still happened without religion. Certainly now, at the point we are at we no longer need a fake man in the sky in order for us to act ethically or morally. If you have some time and are interested in an entertaining debate between the late Christopher Hitchens and Tony Blair around whether or not religion is a force of good in the world see below:Lots of of atrocities have occurred in the name of religion, but would a world without religion have neccessarily seen less?
I think that perhaps we would have seen less. That said many of the atrocities would still have occurred via tribalism. My God versus your God is just another way of having us versus them argument. Humans are good at creating isms whether it's via tribe, religion, nationality, ethnicity etc.
I wish more people believed that. I would say that there are plenty of people (Sticking to the example of Christianity because I'm most well versed in it's lore) who only act morally because of the threat of what happens if they don't. Abrahamic religions in general are very If/Then based, with the 'Then' being enternal suffering, a pretty strong motivator. That's what scares me the most about some of the most devout, they only act like civilized people out of fear of damnation, what happens if they lose their faith? Do they shoot up a school? Bomb indiscriminately? Abuse their spouse or children? That's not a human, that's an upright ape who only behaves because of the big stick held over his/her head. We put dangerous animals in a cage, is the threat of eternal damnation the cage for the upright apes? Is fear the only thing that keeps that darker nature at bay? Certainly now, at the point we are at we no longer need a fake man in the sky in order for us to act ethically or morally.
If the only thing preventing someone from killing people is the threat of eternal damnation, frankly they are dangerous and insane. I never think about hell. Literally, never. I'm not concerned about it and I never will be, it is a man-made place meant to scare impressionable, unintelligent men women and children. Still, I don't kill people and I'm a pretty good dude. The necessity of religion, outside of fellowship and organized congregation is limited in my opinion. Human beings crave a sense of belonging. We need to be able to say I am a… "Blank." That's why people are avid fans of sports teams, political parties etc. I often quote the John Lennon lyric, "I don't believe in Beatles, I just believe in me…" -it's a good approach in my opinion.
Wouldn't that be down to how you were raised? and the way your parents were and their parents were? Obviously in modern times you don't need religion to have morals, but without anyone to teach you them, would they still exist? Genie had no sense of ownership or right/wrong when she was released, she was eventually taught these moral values but back in the day there would have been no one to teach these if they didn't exist in the first place. Does anyone know of some studies done to see how apes value eachother's lives? for example if you placed a ape in front of a cage, and gave the ape a button which convinced the subject the ape in cage was killed, would he press it? if not what would it take for him to press it?I never think about hell. Literally, never. I'm not concerned about it and I never will be, it is a man-made place meant to scare impressionable, unintelligent men women and children. Still, I don't kill people and I'm a pretty good dude.
Does anyone know of some studies done to see how apes value eachother's lives? for example if you placed a ape in front of a cage, and gave the ape a button which convinced the subject the ape in cage was killed, would he press it? if not what would it take for him to press it?
my guess is that theadvancedapes will be able to help you here.
I had a conversation recently with my fiancee's mother. She tried to convince me that we should have a Rabbi marry us. I flat refused. She argued that it wasn't about religion but rather about respecting a beautiful ceremony. While I get her point, I totally disagree. I'm not going to have my marriage start with a definition of this and not that. Especially if we have a family one day, I don't want my kids identifying themselves by religion. We are already societally obligated to segregate by nationality, race, gender, etc. I don't think it's necessary or productive to add a specific religion into the mix. That said, if I have a curious child who wants to explore any particular religion, I would encourage them to do so. When I was a teenager, I started visiting a Zen temple in Ann Arbor, mainly out of curiosity. My mom got upset and asked me why I would want to join a cult when I already have such a nice religion. I love my mom, but she's not exactly the worldly type. I can look back and understand a lot of the ways she parented now that I thought were nuts at the time. But on that one I think she missed the mark by a mile.Human beings crave a sense of belonging. We need to be able to say I am a… "Blank." That's why people are avid fans of sports teams, political parties etc.
My hats off to you for not caving into the in-laws. My father-in-law's pastor married us, so in a way I guess I lost that battle. That said, it wasn't much of a battle as I saw it as a way to show I was embracing his family -and his pastor was a hell of a nice guy. That said, recently my daughter has been asking a lot of questions about this. Right now she is staying with my mom who is a Catholic. I'm a little bit terrified that my mom will go against our wishes and start describing heaven to her etc. My plan is that if she asked me where people go when they die I'm going to turn the question around to her and ask her where she thinks they go. Beyond that, I plan on being very honest with her and letting her know that I'm not sure what happens when people, animals, plants etc. die. This all started when she asked about my wife's mom and where she was. My wife's mom died when she was only 12 years old and at the same time she was asking this, our dog died. Kids are smart, and I'm starting to realize I need to be prepared for some really big questions.
The other day my mother and daughter went to the park together. There was a church that had organized games and free snacks for any kids that were hanging out there. After a round of snacks they gathered the children up for story time. The story was a religious one. My Mom got kind of pissed off about it, didn't think it was cool to lure kids in with free fun and lay some dogmatic stories on them. Guess we have opposite moms. I could really care less. I want my kid to be exposed to as many different wacko's as she can. I plan on reading her all the basic bible stories (I've done a few already) just for the sake of her own cultural literacy. I'm not planing on her believing or not beveling in god, I'll let her know how ridiculous I find most Christian beliefs and also let her know that I love and respect many Christians. I have been doing the "What do you think?" tactic a lot lately with her. She asks many questions that are either just annoying things she already knows or are tough questions with no good answer. I find "what do you think" is one of the better ways to get her to either stop being annoying or to promote a dialog. We lost several family members right before and after my kids birth. She has a pretty good clue about death, in fact she can be downright maudlin about it at times. There is an old guy who is often coming or going when we go to the public pool. He is looking pretty rough, but goes swimming almost every day. First time Hazel saw him she blurted out super loud "Is he going to die daddy?" She has seen the face of death and was naturally curious.
I want my daughter to be exposed to all sorts of ideas, even the crazy ones… Just not the crazy ones "yet." She's only three years old and the idea of some religious zealot telling her the concept of heaven and hell doesn't really appeal to me.
That's the way I'll probably go when I have kids, My parents think it's inportant I think what I want to think and be what I want to be,
which ironically is how I plan to raise my future children.
Beyond that, I plan on being very honest with her and letting her know that I'm not sure what happens when people, animals, plants etc. die.
plants
I'm not too good when it comes to religous beliefs but is there actually people who debate what happens when plants die!?
I agree, but the whole 'How do atheists have morals without jeeeezuuuuuussssss' argument needs an equally silly rebuttal, such as 'The only thing stopping you faithful from rape and murder is a magical sky wizard, right?'If the only thing preventing someone from killing people is the threat of eternal damnation, frankly they are dangerous and insane.
Most of the Christians I know are main stream protestants or Catholics (and I am very close with many Jews, also). Admittedly, I don't intereact too often with a lot of evangelical types, but I would say in my experience that your statement is generally untrue and very simplistic. I think the number of people who take The Word literally is vanishingly small among the educated class, and that modern Christianity has more to do with community, faith, discipline, and spirituality than with rules per se. There are good people and bad people of all stripes.I would say that there are plenty of people (Sticking to the example of Christianity because I'm most well versed in it's lore) who only act morally because of the threat of what happens if they don't.
I meant that when our parents taught us things like "stealing is wrong", they could have POSSIBLY gotten that ideal from highly religous people generations back the family tree.
I agree, goverments can definitely form without religion. the question is at what speed?Ooh, that's a dangerous argument. You're pretty close to implying that people can't have moral standards without religion, which (trust me) is not where you want to go.
Close one indeed! I don't think you need religion to do anything :)Regardless of how governments and societies did form, there's no reason I know of that they couldn't have formed without religion. The mere fact (if it is a fact) that early governments formed around religions only implies that governments can form around religions, not that they can't form not around religions.
I don't mean to disrespect your opinion or anything, but the idea that religion held back the scientific advancement of the human race isn't accepted by any notable historian. I often see people posting the 'chart' that shows a gap in scientific advancement during so called' dark ages' (which didn't really exist, it was an age dreamt up during the renaissance by writers who had a hard-on for the romans), which also grossly misrepresents human history. And for what knowledge was lost, you can't blame Christianity for that when the collapse of a continent spanning empire contributed to a great deal of said lost knowledge (much of which was preserved anyway, by Muslims and other places in the east). I think the most common blame I see on Christians is the Library at Alexandria, which had been destroyed, looted, and burned several other times before Christianity even existed, it also ignores the fact that there were plenty of other centres of knowledge. It's also a very, very eurocentric perspective on human progress, and it completely ignores the intellectual progress in China and the middle east. I'm not disagreeing with your statement that people use religion as a means to persectute others, that much is true, but the idea that religion is inherently a rival of science in history is a very flawed notion that isn't supported in any historical circles, unless you're counting people like Hitchens (who wasn't a historian).