Religion, its Function

[chill]

I am a free-thinker. That having been said, I'm also from a developing country, where free-thinkers are rare. What I would like to bring up is whether religion is good or bad for society. Many new books published recently seem to blame religion for all that is bad int today's society; terrorism, violence, and so on. According to simple cost-benefit analysis, I want to ask whether the cost of religion outweighs its benefits, and hence whether religion is still relevant/necessary to society.

Giving my viewpoint, as a citizen of a developing country: Indonesia's Pancasila, it's most fundemental set of ideals, upon which literally all the country's laws are based upon, state that citizens must be of a certain religion. Most everybody in Indonesia is religious, and more so in recent years, or so I find. But is religion really that bad? Income inequality in Indonesia is horrendous; people from developed countries can scarcely even imagine what it's like. Happiness is subjective, not objective. Though poverty brings unhapinnes, comparative poverty makes it even worse. Religion for these people might help them get through another day. We people who are well of, living in our clean cities and well-watered houses hardly have the right to tell these people religion is wrong. It's about necessity and relevance. For these people religion might be necessary, regardless of whether it's right or wrong.

[DarkColoredLight]

I haven't put too much thought into this but my initial reaction is that religion give people a sense of belonging. When group A (who all feel they belong) feels like group B (who all feel them belong) doesn't belong, this, to me, is where the conflict starts.


Do I think everyone has the right to feel as if they belong? Yes.

But, I can't say whether it's still relevent or necessary to all.

[Tormod]

Originally Posted by chill

Many new books published recently seem to blame religion for all that is bad int today's society; terrorism, violence, and so on.

The books I have seen tend to blame Islam, and perhaps Muslim culture, for most of this, not religion per se. I would be interested in your examples of books which blame religion in general?

Richard Dawkin's the God Delusion is not about terrorism but about the human tendency for superstition (unless I am mistaken).

We people who are well of, living in our clean cities and well-watered houses hardly have the right to tell these people religion is wrong. It's about necessity and relevance. For these people religion might be necessary, regardless of whether it's right or wrong.

I think when religion is a necessity it is a very strong sign that something is very wrong. It is not the religion that is the problem, but the lack of welfare, social stability, education, safety etc. When these basic necessities are not present, religion tends to be a shelter.

[sanctus]

But this also means that religions are only necessary as long as there is something wrong. Now every religion in its own way says to work for the well-being of the people, ergo towards a society with less and less wrong, hence religion should auto-destruct itself .

Now more serious, I don't see no problem with religion giving a shelter to people: it tends to make people feel better (sometimes the only way making them feel better) as chill pointed out. The problem arises in extreme interpretations of religions, because in my view a moderated interpretation of the big world-religions has the only function to be an instrument to make a better society and some need this instrument others don't.

[Tormod]

Originally Posted by sanctus

Now more serious, I don't see no problem with religion giving a shelter to people: it tends to make people feel better (sometimes the only way making them feel better) as chill pointed out.

I partly agree. One problem arises when religion is *enforced*, like when certain missionaries or politicians demand that people adopt religious beliefs in order to gain public services, for example.

[chatlack]

Previous replies have been quite creative, but I think there is an easier explanation on this:
There is no satisfying purpose of life,therefore creating tendency to believe and trust anything powerful, unexplained things. Just there religion gets its place and takes back nihilism and passivism. So society becomes ordered with some (false) belief.
But it has an positive effect even on science, motivating many scientists trying to get clue in a hope on existence.
I rebel on this truth that we dont have anything "great" to believe in reality. I wish I had a belief, living in piece without having the trouble of to choose a way...

[ughaibu]

The situation in Indonesia is atypical, in that by law all Indonesians, except Balinese and Torajans, must believe in one god, selected from one of the following religions islam, judaism or three brands of christianity (it's 16 years since I was in Indonesia so Chill might need to correct my details), in a case like this, it could be mooted that religion is a tool of oppression, the opiate that inhibits revolt.

[Zythryn]

I believe religion is an attempt of people to answer the unknown. The ancient Greeks explained virtually anything they didn't understand with gods (what causes lighting, must be Zeus, etc).
I suspect as groups of humans became more sizable, religion became the next tool used for control/power (the first being sheer strength).

These were both very important societal structures for mankinds social evolution.

Religion itself is not good or bad. It is the people that use religion to control the masses that are good or bad. Religion can be used for good or ill, just as any other tool. The same religion that was used to move great numbers of people to do evil things may, in the next decade, be used for great good. It all depends on the people the wield that power.

[sanctus]

chatlak, I also whish I would believe it makes life so easy, among other things you always have someone to blame.

Zythryn, I completely agree it is just another tool which can be used in whicever way one decides...

[eric l]

This is again a complicated matter. I try to live my life along the teachings in one art of the Christian Bible : the first part of the "Sermon on the Mount", also known as the Beatitudes. But that does not neccessarily make me religious.
Even if you do not believe in an afterlife, you can see that this rules make you happier, and make the world arround you a better place. (Some will argue that I put things in the wrong order here).
Of course, believing in eternal bliss as a reward for temporal sufferings helps to tolerate things that should be intolerable, which makes it easy to understand why privileged classes tend to promote religion for the underprivileged.
What remains is the question whether some sets of good rules - like those beatitudes - would have been so widely known and respected hadn't it been for religion.