Religion

The fact that there is divide even between seculars makes me come to the conclusion that even if there was no religion there would still be two sides yelling "you suck // not, you suck". Human nature is to blame.

  On 5/5/2012 at 5:12 AM, YO303 said:

The fact that there is divide even between seculars makes me come to the conclusion that even if there was no religion there would still be two sides yelling "you suck // not, you suck". Human nature is to blame.

 

this is true. but the way your statement is worded suggests that the lessening of religious belief and dogma in society does not lead to significant progression.

 

If there was no Pope there would still be someone claiming to be an ultimate religious authority. If there was no Curia there would be a secular group condemning Copernican discoveries on grounds of political expediency.

 

Its ultimately a hollow statement. Why did we bother with the Scientific Revolution? Or enlightenment-era Democracy? After all, we still kill each other, and many of our brothers and sisters still live in abject poverty and under the boots of oppressive regimes.

I'm not sober enough for this thread but i'll leave you with this ..

 

My views are very simplistic i admit that, and often i gnore all the horrible crimes people do under the banner of religion, i was really into all this shit when i was younger (very political and involved in activism) but over there years i have become more and more cynical and apathetic (maybe it was just too much stress to think about the horrors. Ignorance is bliss, etc, etc). Maybe these aggressive atheists are doing some good by raising awareness, but all i see are annoying Kony 2012-type of people trying to be part of something, thinking they are making a difference meanwhile all they are doing is selling nice colourful stickers and liking posts on Facebook.

Edited May 5, 2012 by YO303

  On 5/5/2012 at 5:17 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

this is true. but the way your statement is worded suggests that the lessening of religious belief and dogma in society does not lead to significant progression.

 

What if it actually doesn't? I've seen progression happen with religion (ex. Islaam's math), and horrible "evil" happen without it (ex. Stalin).

  On 5/5/2012 at 6:29 AM, gmanyo said:

  On 5/5/2012 at 5:17 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

this is true. but the way your statement is worded suggests that the lessening of religious belief and dogma in society does not lead to significant progression.

 

What if it actually doesn't? I've seen progression happen with religion (ex. Islaam's math), and horrible "evil" happen without it (ex. Stalin).

 

To somehow explain Stalin's atrocities with atheism is just plain wrong. The fact that Stalin or the Soviet state was atheist is not the reason he killed millions. He did it because he simply was a shitty paranoid dictator, not because of atheism. If you think it did, then you also need to consider all the killings and wars done by even the vaguely religious countries over history and you'll get a huge number that would dwarf Stalin's "evil atheism" killings. Basically to explain Stalin's terror with atheism is disingenuous.

 

Saying Islamic science during the 1000-1200 century had to something to do with religion is partly correct, since the prevailing faith tenets were that to work on understanding Allah's creation was a form of worship. But to attribute it wholehandedly to religion is stretching it. But again, you must also take the good with the bad when claiming this sort of thing. Religion and dogma can have an incredibly stifling effect on progress, both socially and scientifically. Look at early European medieval times or modern Islamic states.

Edited May 5, 2012 by azatoth

  On 5/5/2012 at 7:09 AM, azatoth said:

  On 5/5/2012 at 6:29 AM, gmanyo said:

  On 5/5/2012 at 5:17 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

this is true. but the way your statement is worded suggests that the lessening of religious belief and dogma in society does not lead to significant progression.

 

What if it actually doesn't? I've seen progression happen with religion (ex. Islaam's math), and horrible "evil" happen without it (ex. Stalin).

 

To somehow explain Stalin's atrocities with atheism is just plain wrong. The fact that Stalin or the Soviet state was atheist is not the reason he killed millions. He did it because he simply was a shitty paranoid dictator, not because of atheism. If you think it did, then you also need to consider all the killings and wars done by even the vaguely religious countries over history and you'll get a huge number that would dwarf Stalin's "evil atheism" killings. Basically to explain Stalin's terror with atheism is disingenuous.

 

Saying Islamic science during the 1000-1200 century had to something to do with religion is partly correct, since the prevailing faith tenets were that to work on understanding Allah's creation was a form of worship. But to attribute it wholehandedly to religion is stretching it. But again, you must also take the good with the bad when claiming this sort of thing. Religion and dogma can have an incredibly stifling effect on progress, both socially and scientifically. Look at early European medieval times or modern Islamic states.

 

I'm not saying that any of that was caused by beliefs at all. I'm just pointing out that society seems to advance with or without religion, and that jackasses will control people with or without religion. The claim that abandoning religions dogma causes society to improve doesn't seem like a good one to me, either.

Edited May 5, 2012 by gmanyo

They're not necessarily jackasses, you have to work very hard to reach positions of power, the thing is that they get very narcisistic and often have some kind of psychosis so they usually don't give a fuck about the people and just do their best to stay in that position on a long term.

  On 5/5/2012 at 10:06 AM, Kanakori said:

They're not necessarily jackasses, you have to work very hard to reach positions of power, the thing is that they get very narcisistic and often have some kind of psychosis so they usually don't give a fuck about the people and just do their best to stay in that position on a long term.

 

yeah, that

They're nhilists really and I don't blame them, but that's when conscience gets in. If you have the power you should improve the life of everyone around you.

 

I think it's the only right path one can take.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Kanakori

  On 5/5/2012 at 10:20 AM, Kanakori said:

I think it's the only right path one can take.

 

I think we have a new religion.

;-p

you could very easily make the arguments that the crusades and inquisitions were not at all about religion as much as they were about consolidating power.

certainly religion was USED to consolidate that power but its not really anything new i guess.

i dont know.

  On 5/5/2012 at 4:22 AM, YO303 said:

Because why would you care?? once you became an atheist you should live your life free of religion and religious stuff, why keep going on about it? When i became an atheist i loved the idea of being free from all organized bullshit.

Because religions still have an influence. I was raised without religion, but I have somehow feared hell during all my childhood. These ideas can get to you, even if you don't go to church. I never really cared about religion until I "came out" as an atheist, and realized it had somehow managed to hurt me.

Also, I really think the world would benefit from beeing freed from organized superstition, not to mention the core of the main religions which seems to be utterly evil. Not only they encourage ignorance over knowledge, but they seem to have been created for military purposes, at least Moses and Mohammed who raised armies which they used to invade countries. They can be and actually still are used this way nowadays, hopefully on in more sporadic way, and they will always be a possible excuse for stupid wars as they are very violent, sentencing people to death on more than questionable basis. The Old Testament (which contains the Torah) and the Quran contain the worst thought ever written, and only very few ideologies in modern history (such as nazism) can compete with them. I perfectly understand that people want to fight this evil, even if we speak about their superstitious nature alone.

 

  On 5/5/2012 at 6:26 PM, disparaissant said:

you could very easily make the arguments that the crusades and inquisitions were not at all about religion as much as they were about consolidating power.

certainly religion was USED to consolidate that power but its not really anything new i guess.

i dont know.

Many religions were probably designed to consolidate (if not create) power. If you manage to get people to fear something you can save them from, you have a great power.

yeah but i think that consolidation of power would have happened through other means if religion didnt exist

i dunno

religion is stupid

so is not religion

everything

is

stupid

  On 5/5/2012 at 9:12 PM, disparaissant said:

yeah but i think that consolidation of power would have happened through other means if religion didnt exist

Maybe not. Maybe other means would have been less (or more) efficient. It would have been different. To what extend is what we don't know. The problem with religion is that it relies too much on faith and not enough on rational thinking. I remember seeing a documentary where a tribe of hunters came back without any prey and they were like "But we prayed and offered stuff to the spirits, how come we didn't catch any food?" And they concluded that they hadn't prayed enough, instead of realizing that their prayers are useless. It's the same with Christianity. So many people wasting their time and hope in prayers, counting on a god that has never shown its face or acted in any way...

well humans aint logical beings and i prefer it that way. logic is useful but boring and makes life pointless. emotion is fun.

*posting to support disp.*

 

yanG, what makes you think praying is more than some kind of yoga for many religious people? Perhaps mantra is a better word. But the point is, you may be projecting all kinds of reasons on behavior of religious people which may be very different to what is actually the case.

  On 5/5/2012 at 9:48 PM, disparaissant said:

well humans aint logical beings and i prefer it that way.

I disagree; humans have a natural tendency to approach the world logically (though our logic is often flawed).

Homo sapiens = 'wise' or 'knowing' man

  On 5/5/2012 at 9:48 PM, disparaissant said:

logic (...) makes life pointless.

no, life is already pointless, logic just makes that pointlessness unbearable. you are absolutely right that reason is the root of the problem.

 

 

 

NOTE TO SELF: stay the fuck out of these threads, dumbass

i think we'd like to THINK we approach things logically, but world politics proves otherwise.

 

the capability to use logic =/= being logical

 

in fact our complex emotions set us apart from the animal kingdom far more than the use of logic.

Edited May 5, 2012 by disparaissant

I don't see how there can be a god for so many reasons. I just don't see any inside me or in the world in general. Yet, I don't feel like going out and absolutely 100% rule out the possibility there is. That's just arrogant, ignorant and if not anything else... unnecessary. After spending some hours discussing about that with people you realize that it's probably best if you don't bother cause you only waste time and energy doing so. Seeing is believing and I am not gonna make a fuzz out of it neither spend my life sitting in the lotus position on a pile waiting for a siiiiiiiiiiiiiign or something as long as i try to be a decent person. I just don't care, call me if there's a drastic twist of events.

With that being said:

 

*I do believe in the power of faith and how it can affect people. But I separate faith from religions and god(s).

*I am repulsed by organized religions (especially the more extremist ones) and the effect they have on people. The puritanism, the sexual repression, the feeling of being superior and "possessing the truth", the hate, the wars, the ignorance, the hypocrisy of priests and religion leaders.

*With that being said, I got no problem against the figure of Jesus. I do believe you can find some nice things to take as a human being from all his (supposed?) teaching as much as you can from Oscar Wilde or reading philosophy. Of course that has little to do with fanatics and organized Christianity (and other religions) and also that doesn't mean I believe he existed necessarily, especially in the sense Christianity puts it. That doesn't stop me from finding him an interesting theme to be used in Arts either. I've once attended a Sion Sono Q&A after the screening of "Love Exposure" (go and watch it NOW if you haven't) and he was asked whether he's religious/believes in god/jesus. He answered by saying "well...let's just say I am a fan of Jesus" in which I nodded with a smile feeling I can see where he is coming from.

*As much as I am repulsed by religion fanatics and their hypocrisy, the super atheists who always seem to be on PMS mode annoy me too. And that of course goes for Mr Dawkins too. I mean, we got it Captain Obvious, you figured there is no god. Bravo! No need to write books and make tours about it. It's all about the $$$ though.. in the end of the day you and your superiority complex fanboys who put that lousy "A" atheism symbol on their facebook to show the world how they aren't fooled by the religion scheme and how smart and better they are because of it are as sickening and laughable as the religion fanatics and puritans themselves.

Edited May 5, 2012 by Disappearer

lol

Socrates spoke to the Athena and asked her who the wisest person in Greece was so he could meet him/her. Athena responded with, "You are Socrates.". Baffled Socrates said "But I know nothing.". "And that is why you are the wisest" finished Athena.

 

Our mistake is that we assume much to be true to comfort us instead of seeking out the truth ourselves.

 

People will just gravitate to whatever "facts" make them happy. Like cold or hot water. One could argue the former being more comforting than the latter but in the end they are both arguing over the same thing.

Edited May 6, 2012 by ZiggomaticV17

  On 5/6/2012 at 9:17 PM, ZiggomaticV17 said:

Socrates spoke to the Athena and asked her who the wisest person in Greece was so he could meet him/her. Athena responded with, "You are Socrates.". Baffled Socrates said "But I know nothing.". "And that is why you are the wisest" finished Athena.

 

Our mistake is that we assume much to be true to comfort us instead of seeking out the truth ourselves.

 

People will just gravitate to whatever "facts" make them happy. Like cold or hot water. One could argue the former being more comforting than the latter but in the end they are both arguing over the same thing.

 

this is true. which is why it dumbfounds me that admission of lack of knowledge about a particular subject is seen as arrogant.

  On 5/5/2012 at 5:12 AM, YO303 said:

The fact that there is divide even between seculars makes me come to the conclusion that even if there was no religion there would still be two sides yelling "you suck // not, you suck". Human nature is to blame.

 

i doubt they'd be killing each other as much as religious folks do. afterlife is a powerful delusion.

 

psssh VV Cephei isn't the largest, not even close.

VY Canis Majoris is.

i would love to see it go hypernova, it's got a radius like 2000 times that of our sun and was an O type star back when it was young. its also 40x the mass of our sun and is totally just gonna go kablooie all over the fucking galaxy. luckily its far enough away that we dont have to worry about gamma ray bursts but it will probably light up the sky pretty good. only 100,000 or so years!!!!

Edited May 7, 2012 by disparaissant