Religion, what's the point?

I posted for the first time in that thread and then you murdered it. I could start thinking you had it in for me. :)

I reckon the people who posted in page after page, clocking up double digit amounts of posts, would feel slightly more aggrieved ;)

Thankfully I don't number among them... though on a sleepless, boring night, some years ago, I might have.

Anyway, back on topic: religion is outdated and we should have outgrowed it by now. Cue outrage from a select few.
 
I reckon the people who posted in page after page, clocking up double digit amounts of posts, would feel slightly more aggrieved ;)

Thankfully I don't number among them... though on a sleepless, boring night, some years ago, I might have.

Anyway, back on topic: religion is outdated and we should have outgrowed it by now. Cue outrage from a select few.

Seeing that the vast majority of human species is religious, it cannot possibly be outdated. I'd argue that gathering wood in order to cook meals on fire is outdated.
 
Seeing that the vast majority of human species is religious, it cannot possibly be outdated. I'd argue that gathering wood in order to cook meals on fire is outdated.

If I were to moderate my previous statement, it would merely to be that it should be outdated. Racism and group-think, too, should be outdated, considering all we know about how we share much more than what sets us apart, and yet it persists. I wouldn't change that statement if a global poll were to reveal that it's still rife. Not equating them 100%, obviously, as religion has more potential positives to it than racism does.
 
If I were to moderate my previous statement, it would merely to be that it should be outdated. Racism and group-think, too, should be outdated, considering all we know about how we share much more than what sets us apart, and yet it persists. I wouldn't change that statement if a global poll were to reveal that it's still rife. Not equating them 100%, obviously, as religion has more potential positives to it than racism does.

Racism is pretty much narrowly defined. Religion, however, can mean many things to many people. You and I might be using the same term here but in fact meaning completely different things. You never know when someone says religion what idea and concept of religion he holds.
 
Racism is pretty much narrowly defined. Religion, however, can mean many things to many people. You and I might be using the same term here but in fact meaning completely different things. You never know when someone says religion what idea and concept of religion he holds.

True, it's a vague term. Truth be told, we all anchor our behaviour and outlook in the world in things that can't be pinned down 100%. When humourless folk like me come on here and hurl around statements about religion defying reason, we're often talking about it as a metaphysical basis for life, the universe and everything. The notion that some kind of sentient being speaks the universe into existence, and possibly goes on to insist on a certain code of conduct, goes against what I think is reasonable, considering how natural philosophy has graduated into hard science, much of which has obliterated the ground on which a lot of religious reasoning about the universe stands.

Given how much progress has been made in explaining the universe, it seems like intellectual laziness to attribute what seems, at present, unsolvable (how does consciousness originate, where does everything come from in the first place, etc) to a deity.

Neil Degrasse Tyson puts it really well, for me:

Does it mean, if you don’t understand something, and the community of physicists don’t understand it, that means God did it? Is that how you want to play this game? Because if it is, here’s a list of things in the past that the physicists at the time didn’t understand [and now we do understand] [...]. If that’s how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that’s getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on - so just be ready for that to happen, if that’s how you want to come at the problem.
 
The fact that religion persists in this day and age is a sad reflection of how much further the human race has to go.
 
It is slowly going away though, don't you think. Particularly in the information age.

In some circles... Generally you see what you always see, though. It goes up in times of hardship. The fact that it correlates so closely to that, time and time again, kind of speaks against it being a matter of people's conscious and critical faculties.
 
It is slowly going away though, don't you think. Particularly in the information age.
Unfortunately not. Looking from 50 years ago I thought it would have virtually disappeared by now but no.
 
I reckon the people who posted in page after page, clocking up double digit amounts of posts, would feel slightly more aggrieved ;)

Thankfully I don't number among them... though on a sleepless, boring night, some years ago, I might have.

Anyway, back on topic: religion is outdated and we should have outgrowed it by now. Cue outrage from a select few.


Quantity doesn't make up for quality. I had solved the entire matter wrapped it up and put it to bed. Then Raoul destroyed my eureka moment and humanity will be forever bereft of my seminal thinking. It's you I feel sorry for Eriku. Thrashing around trying to find the answers, blind and denied my insight. All the problems of the world are now Raoul's fault, one careless, thoughtless moment and the world pays for ever. I hope you can live with that Raoul.
 
Quantity doesn't make up for quality. I had solved the entire matter wrapped it up and put it to bed. Then Raoul destroyed my eureka moment and humanity will be forever bereft of my seminal thinking. It's you I feel sorry for Eriku. Thrashing around trying to find the answers, blind and denied my insight. All the problems of the world are now Raoul's fault, one careless, thoughtless moment and the world pays for ever. I hope you can live with that Raoul.

Forgot what you posted? Tell me at least this: did you land on there being a god, or no? If so, which? Polytheism or monotheism? Pantheism? Actually, pantheism I could subscribe to, though that's more buddhist/hindu.
 
Quantity doesn't make up for quality. I had solved the entire matter wrapped it up and put it to bed. Then Raoul destroyed my eureka moment and humanity will be forever bereft of my seminal thinking. It's you I feel sorry for Eriku. Thrashing around trying to find the answers, blind and denied my insight. All the problems of the world are now Raoul's fault, one careless, thoughtless moment and the world pays for ever. I hope you can live with that Raoul.

It will come back to you and then you will type it here.
 
Anyway, back on topic: religion is outdated and we should have outgrowed it by now. Cue outrage from a select few.

What does this even mean?

I don't really understand this way of thinking at all.

Even if religion isn't for you (not you specifically), that doesn't mean that the entire population has to give it up. Its all about respect for other people's views and a lot of people are religious and if they want to be, so be it.

I've never been to church and I'm not religious but I don't think that religion should disappear off the face of the earth altogether because its a very big part of people's lives.

If its not for you, then ignore it, but expecting millions of people worldwide to simply outgrow something that's been a part of their lives for years and part of their families lives for generations is naive at best.

For some people its not even about the actual words in the scriptures themselves, but the overall messages relating to religion, live a good life etc etc and some people are comforted by religion. I don't think it will ever go away.
 
What does this even mean?

I don't really understand this way of thinking at all.

Even if religion isn't for you (not you specifically), that doesn't mean that the entire population has to give it up. Its all about respect for other people's views and a lot of people are religious and if they want to be, so be it.

I've never been to church and I'm not religious but I don't think that religion should disappear off the face of the earth altogether because its a very big part of people's lives.

If its not for you, then ignore it, but expecting millions of people worldwide to simply outgrow something that's been a part of their lives for years and part of their families lives for generations is naive at best.

For some people its not even about the actual words in the scriptures themselves, but the overall messages relating to religion, live a good life etc etc and some people are comforted by religion. I don't think it will ever go away.

There was an exchange between me and Mihajlovic where I fleshed out that thought a bit more. You've brought up a couple of new points though, so I'll try to address them.

I'm not saying everyone has to give it up, and I'm not saying I was expecting it to be given up... I'm just saying that the functions that religion serves can be fulfilled by other things, and that a number of elements in religion are unfortunate and hinder progress.

I wouldn't want thought police anymore than you would, and I can see why there are significant swathes of the earth where it's still as pervasive as ever, seeing as it's pretty much a luxury to have a life that allows you to consider this as dispassionately as many of us do.

Clearly it's possible, in theory, for it to go away, seeing as a great number of people manage to discard it. There's also a good number of things in literature, philosophy and other things that can provide comfort, so I don't see it as a matter of some nihilistic, darwinian, bleak outlook overriding the unsubstantiated sunshine of religion. You can retain a sunny disposition without it, even through trying times.
 
There was an exchange between me and Mihajlovic where I fleshed out that thought a bit more. You've brought up a couple of new points though, so I'll try to address them.

I'm not saying everyone has to give it up, and I'm not saying I was expecting it to be given up... I'm just saying that the functions that religion serves can be fulfilled by other things, and that a number of elements in religion are unfortunate and hinder progress.

I wouldn't want thought police anymore than you would, and I can see why there are significant swathes of the earth where it's still as pervasive as ever, seeing as it's pretty much a luxury to have a life that allows you to consider this as dispassionately as many of us do.

Clearly it's possible, in theory, for it to go away, seeing as a great number of people manage to discard it. There's also a good number of things in literature, philosophy and other things that can provide comfort, so I don't see it as a matter of some nihilistic, darwinian, bleak outlook overriding the unsubstantiated sunshine of religion. You can retain a sunny disposition without it, even through trying times.


Fair enough, that's just what I interpreted by the phrase outgrow. Like how you like something as a child but you later outgrow it as you get older and you realize how childish that thing was, that's the vibe I was getting from your post, but I was wrong and admit that.

Sure those functions can be fulfilled by other things but some people just want those functions to be fulfilled in accordance with their religion or religious beliefs.

A lot of things are possible in theory, in fact you say that in theory anything can happen.

Sure you can retain a sunny disposition without it but people use religion as a way to retain that sunny disposition in the same way that others use philosophy or literature and there is nothing wrong with that.

Don't get me wrong, its not as if we're on opposite sides of the table, like I said I'm not overly religious. I just understand religion's place in society and many people's lives and the fact that it won't go away completely any time soon (or possibly ever) regardless of how many people have discarded it.
 
I don't see what religion brings except an illusory notion of life after death. I'd rather face death (like my old pal Epicurus, though I'm not quite in tune yet) than bullshit.
 
Fair enough, that's just what I interpreted by the phrase outgrow. Like how you like something as a child but you later outgrow it as you get older and you realize how childish that thing was, that's the vibe I was getting from your post, but I was wrong and admit that.

Sure those functions can be fulfilled by other things but some people just want those functions to be fulfilled in accordance with their religion or religious beliefs.

A lot of things are possible in theory, in fact you say that in theory anything can happen.

Sure you can retain a sunny disposition without it but people use religion as a way to retain that sunny disposition in the same way that others use philosophy or literature and there is nothing wrong with that.

Don't get me wrong, its not as if we're on opposite sides of the table, like I said I'm not overly religious. I just understand religion's place in society and many people's lives and the fact that it won't go away completely any time soon (or possibly ever) regardless of how many people have discarded it.

When I use the term outgrow, I do kind of mean it that way. But that doesn't mean I equate people to children just for holding on to religion. I'd use that term for a lot of things, like for example the fact that some people and groups who own oil rights in this world fund think tanks and research groups that contradict the scientific consensus on climate change, just so they can add another zero to their bottom line, even though it's wrecking the world for everybody, themselves included. That stems from an urge that I reckon humanity should outgrow. It's a collective thing, and it's not mocking individuals or large groups, it's just lamenting how little humanity has progressed, despite all that we've managed to figure out about ourselves and our surroundings.

You say that some people just want those functions to be fulfilled in accordance with their religion or religious beliefs... Sure, they have the right to do that, but it invites unfortunate consequences. The same way that some people just want to amass the largest amount of assets that they possibly could over the course of their lifetime, and don't care how many people starve, or get cancer as a result of the fall-out from their companies' policies on things pertaining to environmental impact, or what have you.

Just to be clear, I'm not equating private beliefs to the large scale ramifications of huge corporations actions, I'm just saying that there are real consequences that come out of the doctrines that tend to prop up these faith systems. They hold back civil rights, they get tapped into in political movements that are diabolical, they get in the way of the movement towards equality between men and women (which, incidentally, would go a long way in repairing this broken world, as the education of girls and women is one of the things our world sorely needs to overcome a lot of issues), and the faiths often tend to undermine things like science education just because of their own insecurities. Even in Europe you find movements rallying against evolution because it's perceived as a threat towards the religious impulse, and there are active attempts to curb science literacy, which has devastating consequences in more ways than one.but

Religion is not alone in this, obviously, but it's one of the bigger targets you can hit on this subject when talking about the failings of the world.

I'm sure this response will come across as smug, or intolerant, or judgemental, or all of the above and more, so I'm going to finish this by stating that I'm done for the day. Apologies for any offence caused, it's just an honest opinion, stitched together spontaneously, and is therefore probably structured badly and doesn't elaborate everywhere that it should, and other failings of this sort. I might get back to any responses tomorrow, should I feel up to it.
 

Not to answer for Petey here, but to my mind life would be slightly cheapened if it were to go on and on and on. I reckon it would lose its luster after a while, the same way steak would come to be a chore to eat if it were on the menu every bleedin' day.
 
Not to answer for Petey here, but to my mind life would be slightly cheapened if it were to go on and on and on. I reckon it would lose its luster after a while, the same way steak would come to be a chore to eat if it were on the menu every bleedin' day.
Fair.
 
Religion, Nationalism, Racism... and anything else which divides and cases friction between people are pointless. And don't give me all the rubbish about the good that come from religion. Nothing good about religion couldn't also be done in it's absence. It's all fairytales, myths, legends, paedophile priests and suicide bombers.
 
Not to answer for Petey here, but to my mind life would be slightly cheapened if it were to go on and on and on. I reckon it would lose its luster after a while, the same way steak would come to be a chore to eat if it were on the menu every bleedin' day.
Pretty much on the nail. The Sybil who was 999 years old begged to die. The human condition is to be born, live and die (hopefully in reasonable proportions).
 
Religion, Nationalism, Racism... and anything else which divides and cases friction between people are pointless. And don't give me all the rubbish about the good that come from religion. Nothing good about religion couldn't also be done in it's absence. It's all fairytales, myths, legends, paedophile priests and suicide bombers.
Lots of good comes from religion. Of course it could be done without it. Lots of good comes from apples, it could happen without apples.
 
Pretty much on the nail. The Sybil who was 999 years old begged to die. The human condition is to be born, live and die (hopefully in reasonable proportions).
I totally agree with this. It's a point that could well be increasingly relevant in a non-religous setting if the human ability to prolong life progresses as predicted.

There is a lot to be said for finishing your innings and then leaving it to the next lot, I feel.
 
I totally agree with this. It's a point that could well be increasingly relevant in a non-religous setting if the human ability to prolong life progresses as predicted.

There is a lot to be said for finishing your innings and then leaving it to the next lot, I feel.
I agree but I've scored a few runs and they've got their pads on back there, in a frighteningly few overs it will be more than academic.
 
During recent years I've started to doubt I would believe in God if not someone had actively led me to.

I firmly believe religion is the cause of most evil, but it also provides good morals for people that are intelligent enough not to practice it blindly.
 
Last edited:
The problem is not Religion, its mankind's lack of imagination.
We all possess the capacity for enlightenment. but choose (insert vice) and rationalise it with(insert ideology). And when our ideals are questioned we present(insert anything) that validates our opinions, (but is articulated better) as justification for our resulting behaviour.
 
I firmly believe religion is the cause of most evil, but it also provides good morals for people that are intelligent enough to be practice it blindly.
Well that's why it was propagated as an instrument of social control: 'don't worry about getting the shitty end of the stick on earth, your reward is in the next life'.
 
During recent years I've started to doubt I would believe in God if not someone had actively led me to.

I firmly believe religion is the cause of most evil, but it also provides good morals for people that are intelligent enough to be practice it blindly.

Wait, for people who do or don't practice it blindly?

At any rate, the holy books and the religious cultures tend to have plenty of good and bad rules and attitudes. What governs the behaviour of the religious is either whichever tenets they choose to follow, or random chance regarding what kind of religion or sect that they find themselves in. Either way, it boils down to the fact that religion offers up options, people (either the ones higher up the chain, or the individual follower) choose the ones that seem the most palatable. It's not as if religion comes from the outside and injects morals into the society or people, people have to use the sensibilities that are already instilled in them.

Why not cut out the middle man? Why not have free and open discussions regarding these things, rather than claim they come from on high? Religion's tendency to go "because God says so!" also carries the risk of people not actively using or listening to their innate sense of what's right or wrong, or to consider these questions seriously. Recipe for disaster that is, albeit not in all religions.
 
Lots of good comes from religion. Of course it could be done without it. Lots of good comes from apples, it could happen without apples.
I disagree. Apples are evil and should be banned.
When I was a kid some friends of mine and I would go to a little hill with one big apple tree at the top and 3 smaller ones a few (maybe 10) meters down the hill.
We'd split in 2 teams (one team at the big tree, one at the 3 smaller ones) and throw those apples at each other.
Needless to say that we were black and blue afterwards and with this anecdotic evidence I rest my case that apples should be banned together with other fruits which are rather hard and usable as a dangerous projectile by children.
 
Wait, for people who do or don't practice it blindly?

At any rate, the holy books and the religious cultures tend to have plenty of good and bad rules and attitudes. What governs the behaviour of the religious is either whichever tenets they choose to follow, or random chance regarding what kind of religion or sect that they find themselves in. Either way, it boils down to the fact that religion offers up options, people (either the ones higher up the chain, or the individual follower) choose the ones that seem the most palatable. It's not as if religion comes from the outside and injects morals into the society or people, people have to use the sensibilities that are already instilled in them.

Why not cut out the middle man? Why not have free and open discussions regarding these things, rather than claim they come from on high? Religion's tendency to go "because God says so!" also carries the risk of people not actively using or listening to their innate sense of what's right or wrong, or to consider these questions seriously. Recipe for disaster that is, albeit not in all religions.

People who don't practice it blindly, sorry for the typo.

Some bits are relevant to date while others are designed for ancient socities.

I don't believe in God, I still go to church ad adhere to the most important Christian traditions. I'm struggling to believe in the Bible, I think I'm too academic and critical to believe in the source.

The people I can't stand are those that try to force their beliefs on you, much like IS is doing in Iraq these days.
 
Religion, Nationalism, Racism... and anything else which divides and cases friction between people are pointless. And don't give me all the rubbish about the good that come from religion. Nothing good about religion couldn't also be done in it's absence. It's all fairytales, myths, legends, paedophile priests and suicide bombers.

I do agree to some extent but it is hard to even predict how the world would look like without religion.

It's a biological need to lean on a social, common denominator in times of need. I think that is why religious beliefs and wealth are negatively correlated.
 
I disagree. Apples are evil and should be banned.
When I was a kid some friends of mine and I would go to a little hill with one big apple tree at the top and 3 smaller ones a few (maybe 10) meters down the hill.
We'd split in 2 teams (one team at the big tree, one at the 3 smaller ones) and throw those apples at each other.
Needless to say that we were black and blue afterwards and with this anecdotic evidence I rest my case that apples should be banned together with other fruits which are rather hard and usable as a dangerous projectile by children.
:lol:

A fair point, well made.
 
People who don't practice it blindly, sorry for the typo.

Some bits are relevant to date while others are designed for ancient socities.

I don't believe in God, I still go to church ad adhere to the most important Christian traditions. I'm struggling to believe in the Bible, I think I'm too academic and critical to believe in the source.

The people I can't stand are those that try to force their beliefs on you, much like IS is doing in Iraq these days.

No worries... common sense told me "don't", but you never know ;)

Last line I'll agree wholeheartedly with... If people's beliefs were their own and weren't used as excuses for maltreatment of some and favoured treatment of others, and, most importantly, they're kept out of the reasoning for public policy, I wouldn't mind religion so much.