Godless Apostate

[Daradon]

More a general statement over being directed at anyone in particular.

Was coming in to comment when I realized, I think I've commented on all this before.

(EDIT or perhaps your comment is directed at Texter)

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Cheese

^^^ did I say that? You certainly cant read my mind can you? Can you?

I cannot, but I believe the implication was there.

Originally Posted by Cheese

How about we give it a shot? Lets say for the next two millenia? even Stephen then we can compare notes afterwards.

The problem is, I'm not all that confident in either of our abilities to make an accurate account of all the data. The point being that religion is an easy target because of its virtually universal influence, and that it is equally indistinguishable from the effects of culture and society. We can't really imagine a world without religion, because religion is all anyone has known for—well, forever. You think that you can guess what an areligious society would be like, but even this is an illusion. If we were any good as a species at engineering societies, then we wouldn't be living in one that continues to evade perfect function. The problem isn't religion. The problem is humanity, and the utter unpredictability of what motivates people to action—both for good and for evil.

[Nyah]

Proposing that the world would have peace without religion is comical. Human nature will absolutely not allow us as a species to get along consistently without some kind of conflict. Religion, in my opinion, is certainly a big platform for human conflict - as proven in our history and current events. However, take a look at this thread: we have atheists arguing against atheists about levels of belief and how people define their beliefs. Perhaps I'm jumping to conclusions, but it seems to me that it's just in human nature to argue, be territorial, be jealous...even obnoxious. I can admit that I'm human, and I'm ALL of those and then some. I can be a bitch sometimes for no reason and I can admit that. If world peace were up to me, even as an atheist, we'd be fracked!

Anyways...here's a funny read: Hate Mail to Richard Dawkins

http://old.richarddawkins.net/letters/ugly

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I cannot, but I believe the implication was there.


The problem is, I'm not all that confident in either of our abilities to make an accurate account of all the data. The point being that religion is an easy target because of its virtually universal influence, and that it is equally indistinguishable from the effects of culture and society. We can't really imagine a world without religion, because religion is all anyone has known for—well, forever. You think that you can guess what an areligious society would be like, but even this is an illusion. If we were any good as a species at engineering societies, then we wouldn't be living in one that continues to evade perfect function. The problem isn't religion. The problem is humanity, and the utter unpredictability of what motivates people to action—both for good and for evil.

In the bolded words lies the conundrum. The Christian world believes that the Muslim world is evil, and vice versa, the atheist world believes they are both evil and vice versa, the agnostics sit on a fence and sing la la la whilst holding fingers to ear, Eastern religions think it doesn't matter, we will be reincarnated anyways and the Chinese simply laugh at all the round eyes wanting to kill everyone else. wait a second here.....他媽的的緣故，一直計劃！

[Daradon]

A world without religion is most likely, completely impossible. Even scientists believe they have found reason to believe our brains (on average of course), through our genetic code, are wired to tend towards a belief in a higher power.

The bigger reason is that humans always need something to fight about anyway. The tribalism which is also embedded in our very nature, most easily comes out through religion. So even if we could wave a magic wand, and have it erased from our minds tomorrow, I think we would reinvent it the very next day to support our tribalism and differing values.

While I think we have evolved socially as a species and are, ever so slowly, becoming less violent towards each other, a world without violence is a long ways away and probably just as unlikely as a world without religion.

However, I do think there is something to be said about taking as much emphasis off religion as possible in a forward thinking society. Things like separating church and state. Something the US says it does, but very obviously doesn't. Morals and societal rules and perhaps most importantly, foreign policy, should have nothing to do with ancient myths. We will most likely benefit more greatly from a society that uses science and reason to create and continually change it's rules and even values. Cause as society changes, so should it's values. For instance, not eating pork may have made good sense 5000 years ago, but really doesn't have much to do with today's age. Swine flu jokes aside.

One doesn't have to look very far to see societies and leaders that USE religion for their own gain. And that's where it all goes haywire of course. From muslim fundamentalists half a world away to christian fundamentalists right here. The really sad thing is that often it seems that these people KNOW they are just using or hiding behind religion, but are doing it anyway.

That is why it is an important discussion, and why atheists, agnostics, and more secular believers need to speak out against the evils of religion. Or put better, the evils in using religion for anything other than defining your own spot in the universe.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Nyah

Proposing that the world would have peace without religion is comical.

It may only be a small part of John Lennon's "Imagine", but religion did get almost a whole verse.

[Daradon]

My last line should say something more along the lines of, 'your own PERSONAL spot in the universe', as your own spot in the universe would still include how you react to everyone and everything else I suppose.

And so does that line. Which I guess proves the slippery slope in using religion to make any decision or world view.

[GirlySports]

Haven't we advanced now? 1000 years ago with or without religion, anyone outside of a one mile radius was considered an enemy and could be attacked.

But with technology now, don't we know where everyone lives and where every country and culture is? What's there to fight about other than beliefs?

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

What's there to fight about other than beliefs?

Resources.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Daradon

A world without religion is most likely, completely impossible. Even scientists believe they have found reason to believe our brains (on average of course), through our genetic code, are wired to tend towards a belief in a higher power.

I saw a show that touched on this on discovery, never once did any of the 3 scientists on the show suggest anything in our genetic code but rather 1000's of years of bogus teachings and the fear of "nothing" after we die for the reason to believe in the invisible and supernatural.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by T@T

I saw a show that touched on this on discovery, never once did any of the 3 scientists on the show suggest anything in our genetic code but rather 1000's of years of bogus teachings and the fear of "nothing" after we die for the reason to believe in the invisible and supernatural.

I strongly suggest that you read Michael Shermer's The Believing Brain.

Just because these experts did not explicitly speak about genetic predispositions towards belief does not mean that they reject the fairly well founded link that has been established between our environments, social development, and the physical and genetic results that make us what we are today.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Resources.

Why is nobody attacking Alberta then?

[ernie]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Why is nobody attacking Alberta then?

National Energy Program....

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Why is nobody attacking Alberta then?

They're scared they'll be yapped to death and then swallowed up by Danielle Smith's gigantic mouth.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Daradon

A world without religion is most likely, completely impossible. Even scientists believe they have found reason to believe our brains (on average of course), through our genetic code, are wired to tend towards a belief in a higher power.

The bigger reason is that humans always need something to fight about anyway. The tribalism which is also embedded in our very nature, most easily comes out through religion. So even if we could wave a magic wand, and have it erased from our minds tomorrow, I think we would reinvent it the very next day to support our tribalism and differing values.

While I think we have evolved socially as a species and are, ever so slowly, becoming less violent towards each other, a world without violence is a long ways away and probably just as unlikely as a world without religion.

However, I do think there is something to be said about taking as much emphasis off religion as possible in a forward thinking society. Things like separating church and state. Something the US says it does, but very obviously doesn't. Morals and societal rules and perhaps most importantly, foreign policy, should have nothing to do with ancient myths. We will most likely benefit more greatly from a society that uses science and reason to create and continually change it's rules and even values. Cause as society changes, so should it's values. For instance, not eating pork may have made good sense 5000 years ago, but really doesn't have much to do with today's age. Swine flu jokes aside.

One doesn't have to look very far to see societies and leaders that USE religion for their own gain. And that's where it all goes haywire of course. From muslim fundamentalists half a world away to christian fundamentalists right here. The really sad thing is that often it seems that these people KNOW they are just using or hiding behind religion, but are doing it anyway.

That is why it is an important discussion, and why atheists, agnostics, and more secular believers need to speak out against the evils of religion. Or put better, the evils in using religion for anything other than defining your own spot in the universe.

I believe our values, in terms of morals and ethics, are what defines us, and should never change.

[troutman]

I often refer to this - myth is relevant.

http://mythsdreamssymbols.com/functionsofmyth.html

Bill Moyers: Myths are clues?

Joseph Campbell: Myths are clues to the spiritual potentialities of the human life.

Bill Moyers: What we are capable of knowing and experiencing within?

Joseph Campbell: Yes.

Bill Moyers: You changed the definition of a myth from the search for meaning to the experience of meaning.

Joseph Campbell: Experience of life. The mind has to do with meaning. What's the meaning of a flower. There's the Zen story about a sermon of the Buddha in which he simply lifted a flower. There was only one man who gave him a sign with his eyes that he understood what was said. Now, the Buddha himself is called "the one thus come". There's no meaning. What's the meaning of the universe? What's the meaning of a flea? It's just there. We're so engaged in doing things to achieve purposes of outer value that we forget the inner value, the rapture that is associated with being alive, is what it's all about.

Bill Moyers: How do you get that experience?

Joseph Campbell: Read the myths. They teach you that you can turn inward, and you begin to get the message of the symbols. Read other people's myths, not those of your own religion, because you tend to interpret your own religion in terms of facts - but if you read the other ones, you begin to get the message. Myth helps you to put your mind in touch with this experience of being alive. It tells you what it is. It's the reunion of the separated duad {A unit of two objects; a pair}. Orginally you were one. You are now two in the world {duality}, but the recognition of the spiritual identity is what marriage is. It's different from a love affair. It has nothing to do with that. It is another mythological plane of experience. When people get married because they think it's a long-time love affair, they'll be divorced very soon, because all love affairs end in disappointment. But marriage is a recognition of a spiritual identity. If we live a proper life, if our minds are on the right qualities in regarding the person of the opposite sex, we will find our proper male or female counterpart. But if we are distracted by certain sensuous interests we marry the wrong person. By marrying the right person, we reconstruct the image of the incarnate God, and that's what marriage is {physically and spiritually} .

[evman150]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I believe our values, in terms of morals and ethics, are what defines us, and should never change.

If our values, morals, and ethics never changed, then we'd still be burning witches, enslaving "negroes", disenfranchising women, and a whole host of other abhorrent beliefs and practices.

Values, like society and humanity as a whole, evolve.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by evman150

If our values, morals, and ethics never changed, then we'd still be burning witches, enslaving "negroes", disenfranchising women, and a whole host of other abhorrent beliefs and practices.

Values, like society and humanity as a whole, evolve.

Yes, but the basic, fundamental value of "equality of man" was always there. It's just that it's interpretation and application has changed with time.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Yes, but the basic, fundamental value of "equality of man" was always there.

Tell that to women, black people, gays, and the disabled.

You're way off base here.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by evman150

Tell that to women, black people, gays, and the disabled.

You're way off base here.

You don't believe the groups, mentioned above, have used the basic value of "the equality of man" to improve their lot in life?