As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
The sum effect of religion has never been positive in any society.
tbloxham
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
OK, in order to avoid cluttering up the Republicanism thread I shall post my rant against all forms of religion here so that those who want to tell me I'm a fool for not believing in the power of the man in the sky can do so.
First a definition.
Religion is anything which is not allowed to be questioned (or which doesn't care about the answers to questions), and anything which presents a belief system mandated by a higher power who is infallible or inhuman.
So why is religion always bad? Well, firstly God almost certainly does not exist since there is no evidence for any divine actions ever occurring. No miracle has ever been observed, and even if it was we would simply be seeing the actions of a greater science, not God. The only way God can exist is if he faked the entire universe to look as if he did not exist. As science can tell you, if something appears to have occurred in a certain way to all possible tests and behaves exactly as if it occurred that way for all time then it effectively did occur in that way. This means that the question of the hiding god is meaningless. The only 'religious' question is "What happened before the Universe?" and that is a question as meaningless as "Why are Unicorns pink?". By any evidence we can ever gather, there is no before the universe to ask questions about.
So God doesn't exist, or at the very least has never taken any hand in any observable event in the universe (which means he effectively doesn't exist). This means he cannot judge you, reward you or punish you in any way. Any appeal to him is pointless, and no prayers can be granted. He brings you no solace, you do not suffer his wrath and any who claim to have based a system of higher morality on him are lying.
However there is still the argument that perhaps religion is of use to control the people, perhaps providing an absolute law is good and religion should be given the benefit of the doubt because of that. Perhaps we can use religion to tell people good lies, and put it to work for the benefit of society.
However this is clearly ridiculous. Any person smart enough to be a useful part of society must be capable of making a personal rational decision, and as such should easily be able to understand a human authority as presented by society. This authority is questionable, and has a avenue by which it may be changed. Religion does not. Thus people can be just as moral, without wasting time thinking about a pointless lie. So any society in history which has done good works in the name of God, would have done better works in the name of Mankind. They would have had more time, a better morality system, and not been encouraged to act on blind faith.
What about people who are stupid though, why not use religion to help them get by in society. Perhaps, "Do not kill each other because other people do not want to be killed, and if you do you will go to jail. If you disagree, attempt to persuade others and change the law" is too complex. Perhaps "Thou shall not murder or the lord shall spit you on a fiery poker!" is better.
What we are doing here is effectively creating a vast union of people who are so dimwitted that they will believe whatever you tell them. Worse, we have need for a complex values system to give them, which is absolute and the best society can create. We also need people who are smart enough to hand out the teachings and to update the teachings with the changing needs of society. Effectively we need lying manipulators. Now, while things may start out OK what we've effectively done is gathered all of societies most easily persuaded people in one place, and put a bunch of liars and cheats in charge of them. This will always without question lead to an abuse of power, since we have also given the liars and cheats the authority to call upon 'Divine' mandate to say whatever they want.
First a definition.
Religion is anything which is not allowed to be questioned (or which doesn't care about the answers to questions), and anything which presents a belief system mandated by a higher power who is infallible or inhuman.
So why is religion always bad? Well, firstly God almost certainly does not exist since there is no evidence for any divine actions ever occurring. No miracle has ever been observed, and even if it was we would simply be seeing the actions of a greater science, not God. The only way God can exist is if he faked the entire universe to look as if he did not exist. As science can tell you, if something appears to have occurred in a certain way to all possible tests and behaves exactly as if it occurred that way for all time then it effectively did occur in that way. This means that the question of the hiding god is meaningless. The only 'religious' question is "What happened before the Universe?" and that is a question as meaningless as "Why are Unicorns pink?". By any evidence we can ever gather, there is no before the universe to ask questions about.
So God doesn't exist, or at the very least has never taken any hand in any observable event in the universe (which means he effectively doesn't exist). This means he cannot judge you, reward you or punish you in any way. Any appeal to him is pointless, and no prayers can be granted. He brings you no solace, you do not suffer his wrath and any who claim to have based a system of higher morality on him are lying.
However there is still the argument that perhaps religion is of use to control the people, perhaps providing an absolute law is good and religion should be given the benefit of the doubt because of that. Perhaps we can use religion to tell people good lies, and put it to work for the benefit of society.
However this is clearly ridiculous. Any person smart enough to be a useful part of society must be capable of making a personal rational decision, and as such should easily be able to understand a human authority as presented by society. This authority is questionable, and has a avenue by which it may be changed. Religion does not. Thus people can be just as moral, without wasting time thinking about a pointless lie. So any society in history which has done good works in the name of God, would have done better works in the name of Mankind. They would have had more time, a better morality system, and not been encouraged to act on blind faith.
What about people who are stupid though, why not use religion to help them get by in society. Perhaps, "Do not kill each other because other people do not want to be killed, and if you do you will go to jail. If you disagree, attempt to persuade others and change the law" is too complex. Perhaps "Thou shall not murder or the lord shall spit you on a fiery poker!" is better.
What we are doing here is effectively creating a vast union of people who are so dimwitted that they will believe whatever you tell them. Worse, we have need for a complex values system to give them, which is absolute and the best society can create. We also need people who are smart enough to hand out the teachings and to update the teachings with the changing needs of society. Effectively we need lying manipulators. Now, while things may start out OK what we've effectively done is gathered all of societies most easily persuaded people in one place, and put a bunch of liars and cheats in charge of them. This will always without question lead to an abuse of power, since we have also given the liars and cheats the authority to call upon 'Divine' mandate to say whatever they want.
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
tbloxham on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
We do know that, right now, it is causing shit, and so should be worked at now, until it is no longer causing shit, either through marginalization or elimination, and that nothing non-religious replaces it as a thing that causes shit, because we don't need secular shit anymore than we need religious shit.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
alt response:
However, your definition of religion is restrictive and does not adequately define what the word is generally accepted to mean. There are many religions where questioning faith is expected and encouraged.
A new and unique opinion for D&D.
If you tell a man to go kill another man he will ask two questions. Why should I? and What if I lose?
The secular argument can only ever be on the "Why should I?" side. Because, if you lose then you are dead. You rot in the ground, and never experience anything again.
Conversely religion can tell you "Win or Lose, everything will be awesome!" and if you've been indoctrinated to believe it, then you will believe that death doesn't matter.
This means more people can be persuaded, and thus it is easier to get others to commit acts of violence. Thus a history without religion is much less violent and bloody.
This is unknowable. Stop pretending that you know.
The Civil War was not really based on religion at all. Neither was WWI. WWII had the persecution of religion, but not really any religious causes. And so on.
The intelligent people who take their religion seriously question their faith on an almost daily basis, and every day and experience molds their faith. Just because the don't question it based on scientific criteria doesn't mean they don't question it.
Oh really, questioning and the use of evidence are allowed eh? Well, since we know that none of the supernatural basis exists then there is no purpose to religion, it's just lies. Hurrah, religion is gone. Right? Noone believes any more? Since the OVERWHELMING evidence is that it is all garbage and has no truth to it in any way. We'll just strip out all the supernatural stuff and just have philosophy from now on?
Horrible events often produce long-term happy results, and happy events often produce horrible results.
Getting people to commit acts of violence is pretty trivial, even in secular society. People are generally acquiescent to authority of any kind.
Also, I will point out the fact that religion's are rarely followed to the letter. There are always those that disagree with some of the teachings, it is only the zealots that follow the law to the letter. For example, Kenneth Miller is a Evolutionary Biologist, as well as a Roman Catholic. He is kind of a big deal, especially with his defense of Evolution and his attacks on Intelligent Design. ( Wiki page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_R._Miller , his own website - http://bms.brown.edu/faculty/m/kmiller/ ).
I am not saying that he alone makes up for unimaginably negative impact that the Roman Catholic church has had, but there are diamonds in the rough that defy Cardinal Law and have a positive impact on the world, while still believing in their god.
I would like to read this, where would I find it?
You honestly believe that the people in the Civil War didn't believe in God? It doesn't matter what the basis is, even I wouldn't maintain that religion has been the CAUSE of war, religion just makes it a lot easier to get people to go and fight for you.
Do you truly think that the soldiers in the civil war weren't told, "Don't worry, God is on our side, if you die you'll go to heaven!" and that that didn't help get them to stand and die. In a secular civil war you have to tell the guy, "Go fight because of this and this, and this morality. But if you die, then it's all been pointless as you will be dead"
Equating free thought with materialism is extremely fallacious. A cursory glance at the thousands of splinter sects that every major religion spawns should demonstrate that there is plenty of questioning going on, even with the common premsie "there exists a god."
"Lose and the enemy will rape your wife and daughters. If you're lucky, he'll kill them first." That seems to work pretty well too.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Religion, specifically, specific religious practices and organizations, are a problem right now, and do need to be dealt with out of what little predictive power we DO have. But you cannot predict how the past would go. War gave us the internet and women's rights, for crying out loud.
Hating religion, and then coming up with a ridiculous straw man to rationalize your feelings for religion, is not really a good foundation for and sort of debate.
Thomas Aquinas would also like to have a word with you.
Then they would be better people if they stopped believing in god and instead followed things which are real. One second spent thinking about God is one second wasted.
I am amused by how people are quick to redefine religion. If you can question it, and disprove it then it quite simply is not religion. Since if questioning was truly encouraged the Pope would announce from his pulpit tomorrow "Catholics of the world, I've looked into things for 5 minutes online and this is clearly all garbage. Just obey the human laws, pretty much all the good stuff in the bible is patently obvious"
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
This is pretty rich coming from a guy whose definition of religion has been so far been unanimously rejected.
You have correctly noted that religion is not a scientific theory. Congratulations. For your next project, consider the difference between "open to questioning" and "falsifiable."
I'm as atheist as anyone, but it takes a special kind of narrow-mindedness to assert that your viewpoint ought to be stunningly obvious to any thinking person.
Oh, well I guess you are right there would have been wars, I'm sure even in a society with no religion ever they would have found some way to get the people to fight since the ones at the top of society weren't fighting for religion really, but instead for greed or in defence from someone elses greed. So yes, a secular society wouldn't have been perfect, but it would have been better. A society where everyone from birth was taught to question the world around them, and to take nothing on pure faith would have been better than ours.
Without religion there is no basis for oppressing women for example, so we wouldn't need to fight a war to give us womens rights since there would have been noone telling us women were worse with any higher power to back them up. So, when you ask a philosopher why women should be oppressed, and he loses the argument then the logical basis for oppression is gone. When you ask a priest, and he loses, then he can just claim that its what God wants.
This is exactly my problem with this thread, and with tbloxham's original post on the subject in the GOP thread.
This is your standard zealous, bitter-atheist (as opposed to original recipe) ranting about Christianity and maybe to a lesser extent Islam cloaked in the usual bullshit whining about "religion" as a whole.
Guess what, tbloxham? Very little of what you defined as "religion" actually applies to most religions. Very little.
The most infuriating part of the arguments of people like tbloxham make is that they try to pretend they are being objective, logical skeptics who are all scientific and rational, when that couldn't possibly be further from reality.
You're out of touch with reality, tbloxham. Check yo'self.
People were very angry about my "Religion is bad" statement in the Republicans thread, and I didn't want to clutter up that thread with this.
This is ridiculous. You are consistently confusing justifications for causes.
What? There are plenty of non-religious rationales behind the cultural oppression of women. It's pretty amazing that you have been able to lay every reason for oppression at the feet of the evil institution of religion.
One small little flaw with your example here.
When you ask the philosopher why women should be oppressed, and he has no logical basis, but still wants to oppress them for his own personal gain/amusement/merits, he's still going to fucking oppress them. Humans do illogical shit.
Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
Here is a major weakness to your argument: "Without religion there is no basis for oppressing women." I can think of many, many secular reasons why someone would consider it acceptable to oppress women. None of those reasons are right, ok, or acceptable and they are all vile, reprehensible, and barbaric. But they are reasons, and they are secular, without religious influence. Religion causes a lot of problems, but people will find a way to hate people, religion be damned.
Edit: Beaten like a red-headed step child by everybody else who leaped on this.
Yes, because nobody's ever tried to appropriate, say, evolutionary psychology in animals and apply it to humans as a method of explaining/maintaining the status quo when it comes to gender relations, have they? Humans are capable of scraping together bullshit reasons out of nothing when they want to get their misogyny on, religious or no.
Since China is communist (and consequently, atheist), there's absolutely no anti-woman sexism taking place over there, right?
Now you see, what you just said is complete bullshit. Do you want to know why? Because there is absolutely no proof that a higher being does not exist. There's not one shred of proof. Do you know why? Because you can't prove a negative. It is impossible to prove something does not exist. Just because we as a people have not encountered it in such a way that allows you to perceive it does not mean that its not there. It just means we haven't met it yet.
In truth, it is a lot easier to believe that a higher power does exist than the fact that it does not exist. With these great wonders of our world, our solar system, our galaxy, our universe around us, is it really easier to believe that we are here by pure cosmic chance, or that there is something out there beyond our ability to grasp that nudges and guides things?
And for the record, I'm not big on religion. The whole organization and "Do things our way or burn" mentality doesn't really appeal to me. But I have faith that there is more out there than us. Because, well, frankly, if intolerant people like tbloxham are at the top of the food chain, well, that makes things depressing.
Oh man. The last thing this thread needs is some giant South Park douche turd sandwhiching everything.