"God Bless America!"

[bumab]

Originally Posted by Freethinker

What other group (other than a percent or two of Muslems) uses this expression?

Guilt by association then? I don't think that's a valid argument

[mother engine]

sorry but i just cannot get my head around the simplistic view of religion as some kind of social evil. to think scientifically it is essential to find the most objective presence of mind before hand. if one is emotionally incised by, or afraid of something to the point that they enjoy condemning it than any insight into that subject will probably be cast through a lens darkly and act more as a filter to factuality as opposed to a direct line. religion can aid a mind made weak through the arduous connection of nature and nurture and that person can end up doing some pretty monsterous things socially. but take away the religion (if this were even possible) and you may develope monsters you never dreamed of. unless there is some great truth or universal purpose to all of this nothing can be simplified. it may be 'wrong' for someone to be raped but then the person's reaction to said rape may be more beneficial to society en mass than would have occured otherwise. this is not an advocation of rape but the assertion that there is a complexity to existence that can only be simplified to 'good' guys and 'bad' guys at the risk of distorting the facts.

[Aquagem]

Originally Posted by mother engine

sorry but i just cannot get my head around the simplistic view of religion as some kind of social evil.

I agree. Religion, like other collective human artifacts, serves a wide variety of purposes in human experience, some of them noble, edifying, expanding, and exalting to its adherents. It can also turn malignant like any other bit of flesh, probably for as many reasons as flesh does. One of its major failings is the seemingly unquenchable desire to be right about everything, and not to understand that it, like every other human activity, has limits. And I don't see very religious people looking very hard for where they might be limited, but rather inventing ad hoc explanations for why they were right, all along. In science, you'd get laughed off the stage of history for that attitude, which, I'm sorry to say, many scientists have had. The foundation of science, though, is constructed to root out individual ego worship and get back to the study of nature!

[lindagarrette]

Originally Posted by Aquagem

I agree. Religion, like other collective human artifacts, serves a wide variety of purposes in human experience, some of them noble, edifying, expanding, and exalting to its adherents.

These are all feelings people have without religion interfering with the thought process. Belief in the supernatural is self deception.

[Aquagem]

Originally Posted by lindagarrette

These are all feelings people have without religion interfering with the thought process. Belief in the supernatural is self deception.

Sure -- I agree that all of those glowing adjectives I mentioned are available to non-religious people (also, morality, altruism and a host of other positive affective traits that religious people deny we infidels can ever attain). But I would have to say from experience and other studies, neuroscience among them, that, unfortunately, the "grandeur in this view of life" that fills me to overflowing from scientific knowledge won't reach a lot of them. Ever. In that, I've become a pessimist/realist (These two are never far apart).

This could be one of the "extended post" topics I'd like to investigate more, maybe in the Lounge. I use the term "the Great Divide of the Human Mind" to describe the collective cranial split between those who need, and others (like you and me, FT, and others) who don't need the supernatural to be able to face the world. I stare at deeply religious people with wonderment -- they live in a world utterly alien to me despite years of churchgoing and spiritual meditations. They stare back at me in wonderment, and about half the time consign me to Hell...

I have a chapter from a recent sociology book on which I've been preparing notes, anxious to post them or to write a paper from them, because the evidence, good evidence, echoes what I said above - most people seek a release from the fear of death, hope for a life hereafter, and spend large amounts of life energy loving or supplicating a supernatural being not be smitten. And apparently we have been doing it, since Neanderthal days 100,000 years ago, at least.

I would seek out those with a mind more like mine, and I suspect, like yours, to open their eyes to the wonder of science. If others prefer religion, I don't object until their religion impinges on my freedom. Unfortunately, it is impinging a LOT over the last 30 years or so, and I find myself objecting a LOT to their political, economic, and pseudoscientific intrusions. I feel the Age is Darkening rapidly -- I would say twenty years, tops, before the rack is back in style.

But I prefer NOT to be like them by saying there is only one way to truth, and it's mine.

'Tis a puzzlement.

By the bye - I'd like to see that treatise you've mentioned several times about diachronic linguistics someday - either in the Lounge, or a digest post in the main forum area. Linguistics would be a great addition to the new Social Sciences forum!

[Freethinker]

Like I said in another thread, and no one could provide an example of there,

Show us ANYTHING that religion has EVER done that was neither Secular based (i.e. not a contradiction to that religion's written tenets) nor could be done better withoout the religion involved. Show us an example of ANYTHING in which religion has a more positive outcome than non-religion.

[Stargazer]

Absolutely. Whatever good religion brings, it still has the baggage of non-realism or mythology, and I'm not sure why that is necessary or even desirable other than as entertainment.

[orbsycli]

i have a question.
whenever i accidently get into arguements with religious believers, they always tell me...
"there is biblical proof"
what EXACTLY is that??
from what i understand, isn't it just a bunch of documented stories passed down from generation to generation?
it's like that game telephone, ever played it?
a bunch of kids sit around in a circle. one kid tells a sentence to the kid next to him, and they pass it on in a circle. and once the sentence gets to the end of the kids, it's completely mangled.
every kid represents a generation.
the sentence represents the truth, or whatever it was in the first place.
but seriously, what "biblical proof" do they have? this has always boggled my mind.

[Fishteacher73]

Many of religion's early tennets wre based on sanitaion and health issues. Many of the "taboos" involved potentially harmful actions (food poisoning, etc.). The use of an all powerful god figure I think was useful in helping re-inforce these ideals. Just as we say today, "Wait until your father gets home!" , they used god/s as a dominant enforcer of the rules. Much of the backbone of many religions is basically the same, "Don't be a dick to your neighbor". As a general whole these are not bad ideals. The problem stems from when people highjack this vehicle of persuasion and use it for their own ends; ie devine right, the crusades, send me your money to get into heaven, etc.

There are many religions (many are Buddhist based) that take religion as a philosophyas opposed to a rigid system. The "religion" is a path to gain enlightement. Many look at other attempts as incorrect, not worng. Just as it would be incorrect to forget to carry-over in a addition problem, not a mortal sin. The believer has just chosen an incorect path.

I say this not to promote religion (Its not my cup of tea either), but to look at how and why much of the early teachings were the way they were. A look at the practical side, and not so much as the "God farted on the 4th day and there was light" stuff.

[pgrmdave]

Originally Posted by Freethinker

Show us ANYTHING that religion has EVER done

FT - you know the fallacy in this argument - religion has NEVER done anything, any more than atheism has ever done anything. People do things, not belief systems.