religion
religion
Out of context: Reply #1921
- Started
- Last post
- 3,175 Responses
- _niko5
probably been posted a bunch of times but how can a sane and logical person argue against this?
- I had the same reflection about religions.
I can not believe that in 2017 people are still so much into "religions".ApeRobot - People find comfort in communities that share the same values and experience. Picking apart a religion from a materialist perspective is missing the point....Morning_star
- ..I've grown to appreciate Sam Harris and his podcasts and books however his arguments often fail to embrace the positive experiences those with faith have.Morning_star
- Those community values and comforts can be had without organized religion too.monospaced
- Yep. Your point?Morning_star
- Quite. And yours?detritus
- OK. Dissecting a fundamentally flawed system of faith from a moral and materialist perspective is largely pointless. We can all sit here and pat Sam on the...Morning_star
- ..on the back at how articulate and logical he is. The fact of the matter is, is that his opponents wont ever change because their systems of faith aren'tMorning_star
- ...logical. They have value to the faithful that cannot be quantified in material terms. It's just Atheist porn, and not the good stuff ;)Morning_star
- One of my biggest regrets for my country is that the CoE became a toothless outlet for clappy crappy sub-evangelists and doddering pensioner hold outs.detritus
- ..because I agree with your faith in the peripheral social benefits, for which atheism and blunt humanism have no replacement for.detritus
- That said, I find it weird when otherwise agnostic Americans (for eg.) go to their local church for the social aspects.. that just doesn't compute for me.detritus
- There's a few QBners over the years who I know aren't religious who go along, basically to keep familial and local social peace, as far as I can tell.detritus
- saying that atheists have no "replacement for peripheral social benefits" is pretty narrow minded ... religion has absolutely monopoly on sense of communitymonospaced
- absolutely *no* monopolymonospaced
- It's like any tribe, membership affords certain privileges.Morning_star
- @ mono - who's claiming that?Morning_star
- I did. Show me where there's a replacement that compels the non-religious to a higher calling than their immediate selves, mono. Please, show me. Nationalism?detritus
- There isn't one and we probably won't have a well-enough educated society for one to naturally form for whole generations.detritus
- You get the same sense of love, community and a sense of belonging with friends, sports teams (both playing and following) bands, military, movies and tv shows_niko
- You find comfort and comroderie with like minded people sharing the same interests and passions._niko
- what _niko said ... take away all the belief in higher powers, and you still have humans, love, kinship, community, and all the good things that come with itmonospaced
- there doesn't have to be an official doctrine replacement with a label, like religion, it's just how people are naturally before they're told to follow a bookmonospaced
- I just find it offensive whenever someone questions an atheist about morality or kinship or happiness, as if they can't possibly have any without religionmonospaced
- I love you all. I think this is a good discussion. Cheers and happy monday.monospaced
- @detritus, simple answer is love and humanity ... I don't need anyone telling me to be nice to others, and the idea that anyone WOULD scares the fuck out of memonospaced
- I partly agree with you Mono. I think all humans have the potential to be positive contributors to society. However there is nothing that compels them...Morning_star
- I'm more thinking about how to address the root causes of 'the tragedy of the commons' to compel the greater unwashed to act outwith their own self-interest.detritus
- because as much as I know that thoughtful, considered atheists can act that way, my experience is that many people are lazy, hateful cretins.detritus
- ...God(s), as a higher authority, used to inhabit this position. What compels the atheist to act charitably?Morning_star
- How can society itself compel people who don't feel part of it? I believe, sadly, that there will be need for a 'higher influence' for a long time yet.detritus
- or, let's say 'higher structure'.detritus
- in the world's history of experience, there's no religious group that can claim they aren't also made up of some seriously hateful cretins as wellmonospaced
- The idea that you think that religion is the primary compulsion to be thoughtful, positive contributors to society is so naive, so shortsighted, it's offensive.monospaced
- I'm not trying to be mean here, but by that logic, there's no reason for a religious person to be nice to someone that they don't share the same beliefs as.monospaced
- And we know that isn't true.monospaced
- I'm not being absolutist here, I'm thinking of the bottom 80%. My position allows you to be a good-natured atheist, mono. No need to spack out.detritus
- And I'd wager that the majority of ardent religionists around the world DO indeed favour their own before those of competing belief systems.detritus
- btw, my position here was in regards to the loss of the CoE which was/is about as agnostic a religion as one could get...detritus
- Sorry, I just realised that I'm tripping over M_S's posts.. along much the same lines, amusingly...detritus
- @mono. I don't think anyone is denying the myriad problems that Religions have. Is the atheist perspective of right and wrong entirely arbitrary?Morning_star
- "There will come a time when people will not tolerate sound teaching. They will collect teachers who say what they want to hear because they are self-centered."pablo28
- Atheism is just about the (non)existence of god, it doesn't say anything about right and wrong. But there is plenty of room for philosophy of life beyond that.yuekit
- yes, exactlymonospaced
- "What compels the atheist to act charitably?"
you're kidding, rightscarabin - Religious people do more for the poor, 3rd world countries, and the needy than any anti religious dirt back.Hayoth
- It's always liberals disguised as totalitarian communists who bash people who believe something different.Hayoth
- @scarabin. Yes and no. It's an interesting question. Look at it from the experience of Russia. A country that has rejected God under Communism. There is a...Morning_star
- ...generation that has been brought up in absence of god and this is reflected in society and it's seemingly self centred focus. ..Morning_star
- The point being, this is an example of an Atheist ethic influencing society for a whole generation and the results don't look too good.Morning_star
- Weak point, mostly assumption. Russia is barely 13% atheist, and their economic social situation could never be attributed to one factor, like faith, alone.monospaced
- it's not the 'atheist ethic' per se, rather the lack of a replacement for the Deifically-obliged social structures encouraged by religions.detritus
- Japan has close to 40% convinced atheist population. Just sayin'monospaced
- But a significantly more homogenised and culturally-formed population. I have Calvinist belief bases, to a degree - doesn't mean I'm a religionode.detritus
- I had the same reflection about religions.