Flappy
Star
Grrr! But not really....
Posts: 577
|
Post by Flappy on Jan 30, 2011 0:53:13 GMT -5
So yes, there have been a few debates about god(s), but I want to get down to the point of religion.
Here's what I think:
1.Religion brings us no closer to knowing whether or not there is or is not a god. Only science can do this.
2.Most religions are arrogant. There are few (like Buddhism and Scientology in my opinion) which are less arrogant. Anytime a person or book tells you something is true regardless of the facts, should be questioned.
3.Religion is holding us back. Religion is like a cork in the bottle that is truth. Religion claims to have truth, but won't give us any reason to believe it as truth. In other words, it is stopping our search for truth.
I may come up with more of my opinions on religion, but what do you think?
also, please remember, this is a debate about religion. Not about the existence of god, the creation of the universe or the origin of life. These can be brought up as sub-topics and points to back up opinions, but please don't let them become the sole topic of this debate.
|
|
|
Post by Flags_Forever on Jan 30, 2011 1:02:33 GMT -5
1. Science can't do that, either. 2. Agreed, but Scientology? It's the single most arrogant cult of all time. I'm curious as to why you believe otherwise. 3. I would argue that religion as interpreted by extremists is what's holding us back.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Jan 30, 2011 1:02:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Jan 30, 2011 1:16:14 GMT -5
Religion is a cultural system that creates meaning by establishing symbols that relate humanity to truths and values. - paraphrase of wikipedia
Now - the problem with religion is that people skip out on that last bit in some way, establishing symbols that relate humanity to truths and values. The ways in which this last bit is screwed up by people are listed as follows:
1. People create truths instead of symbols - for instance "God said so." Any religion that argues this implies that God, of any form, which in all cases is defined as super-human and beyond humanity, speaks your language and talked directly to you. Now - if the god you believe in does speak your language and talked directly to you - this is a truth. Otherwise, this is not a truth you can believe in. Bad truth.
2. People create symbols that have questionable truths - for instance, any holy book that contradicts itself anywhere inside. While I am no expert on holy books - many people from many different religion have pointed out that many holy books have many contradictions. Bad symbol.
3. People do not connect humanity to the truths or values they believe in. Example - All religions I've heard of have the golden rule - people don't follow the golden rule. The golden rule is "Do unto others as you would have done unto you" (that's the Christian version at least) There are many variations. The value implied is that all people should be treated fairly. Connecting the value to humanity would be applying the golden rule and following it, treating others fairly. Yeah - we all know we don't do that all the time. Bad relation of humanity to values.
So the above 3 points basically are showing that most religions - are followed poorly. That is, if you say you're of one religion - you're basically doing it wrong (unless you're doing it right, and some people do - though they are rare and few and far between).
If religion was done right - I don't see a problem with it. It's a cultural medium connecting us humans to truth and values - none of that is bad. It is in improper application of religion, that all of Flappy's problems come from.
In regards to those problems that Flappy pointed out:
1. Religion is often time the acceptance of belief on faith - which is inherently the lack of reason. Claiming faith denies reason, so there is no truth in faith or at least no progress towards truth in faith. If you are wrong, you are very wrong and there is no hope of correcting it, where as someone who does not claim faith was at least on the right track.
2. All religions that say (in some way or another) "if you don't follow this religion you are punished for eternity" are arrogant. Any religion that states that it knows the truth is arrogant. Any religions that expects you to believe what someone else thought of - is arrogant. So I think we've ruled out all religions except for most forms of Buddhism by now.
3. Religion is not holding us back any more than any form of culture holds back society. Yes, if the Christian dark ages had not happened - our technology would be 100000 times more advanced than today, but even without that - even people who are not religious - think along similar lines. Competition amongst people, dominion over the earth, producing many children, all of these are both cultural and religious problems that plague the earth. I would argue that these 3 basically encompass all of the problems that plague the earth - and so if we just removed religion - we wouldn't effectively get rid of the problem. Most cultures have these inherently embedded and so it is not surprising that religions would have them too.
In terms of your argument in #3 - religion is a cork in the philosophical bottle - as soon as you claim faith you lose reason and reason is the road to philosophical truth. But other than that, religion doesn't hold anyone back philosophically - philosophy is the application of reason to relate humanity to truth and values.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jan 30, 2011 1:29:53 GMT -5
1.Religion brings us no closer to knowing whether or not there is or is not a god. Only science can do this.
First of all, it's "God". Also, the whole idea of religion is based around faith. It really doesn't matter if in one's religion there is a God, many Gods, or some kind of a rainbow power, we choose to belive in those things because at the end of the day we want to belive that there is some kind of a greater good, that when all is said and done the good guy gets the girl, that there is some kind of a greater universal justice in this world. And maybe deep inside we know those are just stories, but at the same time even by cosidering them to be truth we give them power of the truth itself. Enforcing what we consider to be justice onto this world, and thru that making what was only an idea in our head to become a reality, giving birth to universal justice itself, how ever you choose to call it. Maybe that's all there really is to God himself, maybe just by believing in him makes him real. Of course there is an alternative, realize that we are all of no importance, sitting on a rock, and about to die in an universe with no justice at all.
2.Most religions are arrogant. There are few (like Buddhism and Scientology in my opinion) which are less arrogant. Anytime a person or book tells you something is true regardless of the facts, should be questioned.
Sicentology is arrogant.
3.Religion is holding us back. Religion is like a cork in the bottle that is truth. Religion claims to have truth, but won't give us any reason to believe it as truth. In other words, it is stopping our search for truth.
Great Civilizations have been build thanks to the religions of the world, they have united people many times over. There were few tribes dating back to roman times that were mostly atheist, they were not the one's who were making all of the advancements. During dark ages the monks (of Ireland in the big part) were the one's that saved a lot of knowledge from the roman times. Yes, there was a period where Catholic church advocated for some theories that over time were proven wrong, and that they at one point had a monopoly on learning. But that's because over 100s of years before that they were the only scientific institutions, there was no other. Maybe they were not perfect but they were there, if religion wasn't in place at that time there would be no institution at all.
|
|
|
Post by austkyzor on Jan 30, 2011 1:59:56 GMT -5
Religion, while seemingly arrogant, extremist, or redundant nowadays, are still important. It's not about how close they get to God, it's about how they go about doing it. It's not so much a system of belief as it is a way of celebrating one's belief.
Also, Buddhism isn't a religion, and I'd really wish people would stop calling it such.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Jan 30, 2011 3:02:08 GMT -5
btw "a god" is correct. If you speak of the Christian God, it must be capitalized because (and only because) it is a proper noun.
Edit: Buddhism IS a religion. You don't convert to it though and it is not organized religion. It doesn't have a set of pre-defined values, but it does have values. It's goal may not be universally focused but it does focus on the cause and nature of the universe. It is a culture that uses symbolism to connect humanity to truth and values (if anything buddhism is sort of the ultimate religion because it doesn't let organization and societal concerns distract from the connection of humanity to truth and values). I realize there're different definitions for religion, and by some definitions Buddhism does not qualify, but for the sake of argument all religions do fit into the category of the definition I paraphrased from wikipedia earlier and so it is probably better to stick with that definition, even if only for the sake of debate.
|
|
metoyou
Meteorite
A dream we dream alone is merely a dream, but a dream we dream together can become reality.
Posts: 34
|
Post by metoyou on Jan 30, 2011 4:58:28 GMT -5
I have a tendency to ramble so I will try and organize this so it is brief and concise.
--So far Hindu traditions have been left out of the equation, even though it is as broadly an excepting "religion" as any other (Buddhist traditions spun off of Hindu traditions). It is important to remember that these two aren't really -isms (implying central tenants and stead fast doctrines). It is fair to classify these two belief systems as religions, but keep in mind that they represent much more than a metaphysical orientation. They are cultures, ways of life. To be Hindu is more than accepting the numerous gods. It is, in a way, like being Jewish. There is more to being Jewish than the Torah. The belief systems and practices are intimately tied to heritage and tradition.
--krzych32: You touch on an interesting point with the first part of your post, but let me perhaps develop the idea a bit further. Just because some have a belief in God or a set of gods does not mean that they become real. That argument has been attempted in the past by a Christian theologian and has since been dis-proven. I don't remember the name off the top of my head, but his argument was: The most powerful thing I can imagine is God, and if I can imagine past that image, then I really didn't know God in the first place, but now my new image must be correct. The idea is that God is the sum of all imaginable power (power implies more than dominance, just FYI). It relates to your comment because it assumes that our ability to imagine a sort of existence actually gives life to that existence. I.e. whatever I imagine becomes real, and I am sure we can come up with simple experiments to examine this hypothesis. However, a belief in God is real in it's consequences. People believe in God, and therefore act as if He/She/it is real. This brings reality to the belief. These consequences make faith come to life. So although God may not be real in actuality, the belief is, and therefore the belief and actions that follow from that belief must be handled.
--The rest is in response to the original post, particularly building on comments made by Ryan:
1)I don't know if I would say for sure that there is no truth in faith. Faith is without reason, but even a random guess or belief in another authority is correct from time to time. For example, if I were to say that the origin of the word "Idiot" is derived from Greek and means "someone who is ill informed about politics or someone who does not participate in political discussion, which was understood to not be fulfilling ones civic duty" you would have to take it on faith. You could look it up and see that my definition is supported by many sources, but ultimately even if you learn the language, study intensely, travel to Greece and ask everyone who speaks the language, you are, in ways, taking it on faith (you are assuming that others know what they are talking about and are constructing your logic on that assumption). Now you would have considerable reason to believe it, because everything you encounter and value as authoritative is confirming the definition as true, you are still ultimately taking others word for it. How different is this from religion? If everyone you know and trust as authoritative is telling you something is true, and has defined certain experiences as proof (for example, speaking in tongues), then is it reasonable to doubt it? Obviously the difference in the examples relates to exposure and generalizability, but just because every single person in the world agrees doesn't mean something is absolutely true. Conversely, just because everyone denies it doesn't mean something is absolutely false. So the argument surrounding metaphysical beliefs thus becomes the degree of assumption. The tendency is that science assumes less and religion assumes more, but they both utilize logic.
2)Religion is arrogant because it thinks it has the right answer. Science is arrogant because it thinks it has the right answer. So are conservatives, liberals, capitalists, communists, Hindus, Africans, moderates, and the list goes on. Arrogance is defined as "Having excessive pride in oneself." (pulled from Wiki). The point of debate in this definition is the word "excessive". Ultimately this word is unquantifiable, so lets assume that every opinion is valued on a scale of 1:1 and something is excessive if its value exceeds this assumed quantified ratio. I would wager that there is not one opinion accepted globally (because restricting your pole to a local survey would be an arrogant display) at a rate higher than 50%, meaning that every single opinion has a breath of arrogance in it (i.e. the value is assumed to be on a level higher than 1). And furthermore, if there was an opinion that broke 50% acceptance, the basis for it's success is built on an arrogant belief in the first place. This being said, the argument over who is more arrogant is really rather petty. It doesn't matter. What is more important is understanding why people think/act the way they do and realizing the consequences of actions.
3) Why is religion holding us back? There is actually sociological research that talks about the importance of restraint in maintaining a healthy human psyche. Although not universally accepted, the argument is that if we don't have boundaries and rules, we become slaves to our desires. I.e. restrictions help us live a more happy and fulfilled life. If being held back means a restriction of knowledge, than every government is responsible for holding its people back. If being held back means not being able to do whatever you want to, then money holds you back. But in the same way, money provides us the ability to do some of the things that we want to do. Government provides an infrastructure through which we can learn and grow, and religion defines for us a medium through which we can express ourselves and connect with others. My point is that this argument is all about perspective. What may limit one persons agency may save an others life. Allow me to put this argument into another context: Free market capitalism allows people to compete with no regulation. This means that companies can make deals that best benefit them, and often rewards go to those who can innovate. This pushes technology and, it can be argued, "moves us forward". But there is a cost. In the US (not a completely free market, but close enough for this example), the top 1% of the population control 40% of the wealth while the bottom 40% control 20% of the wealth (and the gap is still growing). This means that even though technology is advancing at a quick rate, more people are becoming poorer. On the contrary, a social system that regulates markets and provides benefits for all citizens consequently improves the lives of the masses, but because funds are tied up in looking after everyone and the fact that there is regulation, corporations cannot grow as big and technology would not advance as quickly. In both situations something is being held back. The decision thus becomes much more subjective: Which world view produces the most favorable consequence? This question is answered in the formation of social structures, which include businesses, markets, governments, religions, agencies, and any other institution you can think of.
It appears that I have failed to keep this short, but hopefully there is something of value in my argument. As a closing point, I recognize that my position is very arrogant. But then again, I would argue that I am among like company.
|
|
metoyou
Meteorite
A dream we dream alone is merely a dream, but a dream we dream together can become reality.
Posts: 34
|
Post by metoyou on Jan 30, 2011 5:02:06 GMT -5
Just re-read my response to krzych32 and realize that I wasn't the most clear. Let me know if you need clarification
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jan 30, 2011 13:36:00 GMT -5
This thread is more useless than religion. At least religion gives people hope.
|
|
Flappy
Star
Grrr! But not really....
Posts: 577
|
Post by Flappy on Jan 30, 2011 13:57:53 GMT -5
1.Religion brings us no closer to knowing whether or not there is or is not a god. Only science can do this. First of all, it's "God". No it's "god(s)" because it is an unknown, trying to give something that is unknown an identity doesn't do anything. So it is not "God" it is "god(s)". Claiming a single deity by name is arrogant. I don't disagree. My argument is against religion. Not the existence of god(s) or a greater good. Oh yeah, now that I'm doing some research on it, it is kind of arrogant. No arrogant than other religions though. My point was meant for today. Back then, we didn't have the scientific knowledge that we do today. I do not claim that religion has never pushed us forward or advanced us, but I don't think it's doing that at all today.
|
|
vichilux
Star
Hatsune Miku LALALALALA :D
Posts: 699
|
Post by vichilux on Jan 30, 2011 21:06:42 GMT -5
This thread is more useless than religion. At least religion gives people hope. Yeah, but this thread is fun and religion is not! ;D And in serious bussiness, not all religions give hope... some most of them just suck (in one or another way). So yeah... also: hehe, jk...
|
|
metoyou
Meteorite
A dream we dream alone is merely a dream, but a dream we dream together can become reality.
Posts: 34
|
Post by metoyou on Jan 30, 2011 21:46:46 GMT -5
Wow, there is a lot of contempt for religion on the moon. Many of the posts on this thread and most of those I have seen on others are people either venting frustration or putting down religion for the purpose of propping themselves up. Alex's comment for example, was that really necessary? Since there is a significant portion of the world that believes in a type of religion, is a discussion about it really useless? Religion shapes the way people think, so understanding the belief system is pivotal to understanding the person. To avoid another long response, because I know most wont read it, my point is this: Regardless of whether or not you agree with religion, you are not above it. We all live in a world that is constantly shaped by religion and to disregard it as unimportant or useless is counterproductive/crippling to almost any social/political goal you may have. Furthermore, you yourself engage in very similar practices as religious people whether you like to accept it or not (examples would elongate my response, and then people won't read it, so I shall spare you). And I realize this is an appeal to authority in an attempt to add validity that some may not accept, but this argument is coming from an Atheist.
|
|
|
Post by SwimFellow on Jan 30, 2011 21:50:05 GMT -5
Religion is fine. Extremists aren't.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Jan 30, 2011 22:21:22 GMT -5
SwimFellow - you have had some posts that I don't like and some posts that I do like, but that is by far your best that I've seen.
^^What he said.
|
|
|
Post by SwimFellow on Jan 30, 2011 22:57:31 GMT -5
Lol. Even if I don't agree with you all the time Ryan, your one of the most awesomest people on the moon.
|
|
Flappy
Star
Grrr! But not really....
Posts: 577
|
Post by Flappy on Jan 31, 2011 1:14:59 GMT -5
Wow, there is a lot of contempt for religion on the moon. Many of the posts on this thread and most of those I have seen on others are people either venting frustration or putting down religion for the purpose of propping themselves up. Alex's comment for example, was that really necessary? Since there is a significant portion of the world that believes in a type of religion, is a discussion about it really useless? Religion shapes the way people think, so understanding the belief system is pivotal to understanding the person. To avoid another long response, because I know most wont read it, my point is this: Regardless of whether or not you agree with religion, you are not above it. We all live in a world that is constantly shaped by religion and to disregard it as unimportant or useless is counterproductive/crippling to almost any social/political goal you may have. Furthermore, you yourself engage in very similar practices as religious people whether you like to accept it or not (examples would elongate my response, and then people won't read it, so I shall spare you). And I realize this is an appeal to authority in an attempt to add validity that some may not accept, but this argument is coming from an Atheist. I disagree. I am in no way trying to make myself above people of religion. I view all people equally. I think people of religion are sadly misinformed, and they think the same of me. I do think religion can be and is a hindrance, but I believe good can also come from it. I don't believe that religion is at all necessary to live a happy and fulfilling life either. (Finland, for example, one of the least religious countries, is also one of the happiest countries. Norway is also on both lists.) Just sayin'. Religious people do a lot of good for the cause of their religion. (Missionaries, church groups who help out third-world countries, and whatnot). I'm actually beginning to gain some more respect for religion. Although I still believe that the world doesn't need it. I also still think that at least the first two of my original points are true. Religion brings us no closer to knowing whether or not god(s) exist, only science can do that. And most religions are arrogant in terms on knowledge. (They claim to know the truth, but do not give any reason why it is truth.)
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Jan 31, 2011 9:13:59 GMT -5
One of the points that metoyou was bringing out (and correct me if I'm wrong) was that Science doesn't bring you any closer to knowing the truth. Everything you read about in science you take on the authority of the people who discovered it. Religion is similar. Unless YOU, personally, experience something, you take everything on faith. Science may bring scientists closer to knowing whether or not (a) god(s) exist(s) but no matter what, you'll be taking it on faith.
And about the arrogant thing, metoyou also (very clearly might I add) pointed out that every belief is arrogant, or based on an arrogant belief. You claim that religions are arrogant because they claim truth but do not offer reason - but the followers of that belief have enough reason, and would therefore call you arrogant for assuming you have more reason then them to believe that they do not know the truth. See the flipside?
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Post by Cortney on Jan 31, 2011 13:37:46 GMT -5
Both sides have reasons for believing what they believe. My main opposition to religion is that their reasons tend to be based on "facts" with no evidence or "religious experiences" that can be explained by science.
Keeping this in mind, I'm Agnostic. Even so, I pretty much think most organized religion is false based on the proof that has been offered. If a god is real, I don't think it's the caring, monotheistic God that so many people follow.
|
|
|
Post by SwimFellow on Jan 31, 2011 22:43:58 GMT -5
See above..
I don't really care if there is a god.. If there is, I doubt it has power over us. Or even know we exist. I think it's probably just a scale. Maybe there's a higher power to our "higher power."
|
|