Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6141516
Results 151 to 154 of 154

Thread: General religion

  1. Top | #151
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    6,592
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    11,631
    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
    I'm interested in a science-informed naturalistic spirituality/religion myself. There are several on offer. I see no good reason that anti-science ideas should be valued though. The fact is, we know reality well-enough that it's not the case that "anything goes". I don't know how to respect people that deliberately reject truth in order to console themselves with lies. There's nothing necessary in that. Does "evolved to be religious" mean evolved to believe the specific superstitions that "militant atheists" take to task?
    Religion is a strange duck because people get to vote the correct answer to a question. Whatever is popular enough becomes the truth. This obviously doesn't work in a classroom. 4 + 4 cannot equal 19 no matter how many students got the answer wrong simply because their religion tells them the answer is 19. That's basically the problem. Persons think their religion is special and that it therefore is always going to be true, and that whatever it inspires them to think or do is acceptable.
    Hmmm. I don't know about that. I think that religion can be progressive. Just yesterday, the pope said that he approved of gay civil unions. I thought that was pretty progressive coming from a pope. Imo, the current pope is far more progressive than those in the past. This may just be a baby step, but it's a step in the right direction.

    ...


    To sum it up, my belief is that in all things that humans create, there is usually both a positive and a negative side. This is true of religion. And, as I've mentioned earlier, religion often does evolve and become more progressive. I see that as a positive aspect. I doubt it will ever go away, but I certainly hope it will become far more progressive than it is currently in much of the US. We have a long way to go, but maybe it's not hopeless.
    Kudos to Francis. He obviously has a conscience, a good thing for our species.

    It's important for any individual, religious or not, to be able to separate woo and religion. Woo is always going to be woo and religion is always going to be religion. The degree to which religion incorporates woo is the degree to which religion will always be harmful, so we can think of woo as harmful, religious waste.

    An argument can be made that religion is woo practiced at the group level. But why does religion need to have woo at all? If we're going to praise religion for it's social benefits then lets do that. Whence cometh the need for woo?

    But I understand the need for woo, which arises simply because of cognitive differences. Our brains simply have a long way to go. Woo, tribalism, etc. - it's part of what we are.

  2. Top | #152
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Georgia, US
    Posts
    4,269
    Archived
    3,862
    Total Posts
    8,131
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post

    Hmmm. I don't know about that. I think that religion can be progressive. Just yesterday, the pope said that he approved of gay civil unions. I thought that was pretty progressive coming from a pope. Imo, the current pope is far more progressive than those in the past. This may just be a baby step, but it's a step in the right direction.

    ...


    To sum it up, my belief is that in all things that humans create, there is usually both a positive and a negative side. This is true of religion. And, as I've mentioned earlier, religion often does evolve and become more progressive. I see that as a positive aspect. I doubt it will ever go away, but I certainly hope it will become far more progressive than it is currently in much of the US. We have a long way to go, but maybe it's not hopeless.
    Kudos to Francis. He obviously has a conscience, a good thing for our species.

    It's important for any individual, religious or not, to be able to separate woo and religion. Woo is always going to be woo and religion is always going to be religion. The degree to which religion incorporates woo is the degree to which religion will always be harmful, so we can think of woo as harmful, religious waste.

    An argument can be made that religion is woo practiced at the group level. But why does religion need to have woo at all? If we're going to praise religion for it's social benefits then lets do that. Whence cometh the need for woo?

    But I understand the need for woo, which arises simply because of cognitive differences. Our brains simply have a long way to go. Woo, tribalism, etc. - it's part of what we are.
    Yeah. That makes sense.

  3. Top | #153
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    8,286
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    14,032
    Rep Power
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post

    Hmmm. I don't know about that. I think that religion can be progressive. Just yesterday, the pope said that he approved of gay civil unions. I thought that was pretty progressive coming from a pope. Imo, the current pope is far more progressive than those in the past. This may just be a baby step, but it's a step in the right direction.

    ...


    To sum it up, my belief is that in all things that humans create, there is usually both a positive and a negative side. This is true of religion. And, as I've mentioned earlier, religion often does evolve and become more progressive. I see that as a positive aspect. I doubt it will ever go away, but I certainly hope it will become far more progressive than it is currently in much of the US. We have a long way to go, but maybe it's not hopeless.
    Kudos to Francis. He obviously has a conscience, a good thing for our species.

    It's important for any individual, religious or not, to be able to separate woo and religion. Woo is always going to be woo and religion is always going to be religion. The degree to which religion incorporates woo is the degree to which religion will always be harmful, so we can think of woo as harmful, religious waste.

    An argument can be made that religion is woo practiced at the group level. But why does religion need to have woo at all? If we're going to praise religion for it's social benefits then lets do that. Whence cometh the need for woo?

    But I understand the need for woo, which arises simply because of cognitive differences. Our brains simply have a long way to go. Woo, tribalism, etc. - it's part of what we are.
    The woo can be explained. If we're to bind a large group of disparate people together and we want to avoid conflicts between them, the thing that binds them together needs to be abstract. Preferably mysterious. A nation is the same thing. Nations are also bound together by nothing but woo. There's very little that sets people apart on either side of a national border. It still works in motivating people to do all kinds of things, like military service.

    Smart people see through the hand waving and magic. Stupid people take the woo litteraly.

    I think it makes a lot of sense when John Cleese said that he doesn't think the people who wrote the Bible were litterally minded. I think they wrote what they did because they had to. And our brains are no different from the brains of people 2000 years ago. Smart people understand the rituals and see the beauty in it. Less sophisticated thinkers believe God litterally exists.

  4. Top | #154
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    6,592
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    11,631
    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post

    Hmmm. I don't know about that. I think that religion can be progressive. Just yesterday, the pope said that he approved of gay civil unions. I thought that was pretty progressive coming from a pope. Imo, the current pope is far more progressive than those in the past. This may just be a baby step, but it's a step in the right direction.

    ...


    To sum it up, my belief is that in all things that humans create, there is usually both a positive and a negative side. This is true of religion. And, as I've mentioned earlier, religion often does evolve and become more progressive. I see that as a positive aspect. I doubt it will ever go away, but I certainly hope it will become far more progressive than it is currently in much of the US. We have a long way to go, but maybe it's not hopeless.
    Kudos to Francis. He obviously has a conscience, a good thing for our species.

    It's important for any individual, religious or not, to be able to separate woo and religion. Woo is always going to be woo and religion is always going to be religion. The degree to which religion incorporates woo is the degree to which religion will always be harmful, so we can think of woo as harmful, religious waste.

    An argument can be made that religion is woo practiced at the group level. But why does religion need to have woo at all? If we're going to praise religion for it's social benefits then lets do that. Whence cometh the need for woo?

    But I understand the need for woo, which arises simply because of cognitive differences. Our brains simply have a long way to go. Woo, tribalism, etc. - it's part of what we are.
    The woo can be explained. If we're to bind a large group of disparate people together and we want to avoid conflicts between them, the thing that binds them together needs to be abstract. Preferably mysterious. A nation is the same thing. Nations are also bound together by nothing but woo. There's very little that sets people apart on either side of a national border. It still works in motivating people to do all kinds of things, like military service.

    Smart people see through the hand waving and magic. Stupid people take the woo litteraly.

    I think it makes a lot of sense when John Cleese said that he doesn't think the people who wrote the Bible were litterally minded. I think they wrote what they did because they had to. And our brains are no different from the brains of people 2000 years ago. Smart people understand the rituals and see the beauty in it. Less sophisticated thinkers believe God litterally exists.
    Confirmation bias is hardwired in our brains. It literally selects against information that does not agree with its bias. It's probably the best demonstration we have that there is no such thing as free will in any macro sense.

    But you are right, there is power in woo, which explains its inclusion in our behavior despite large differences in cognitive ability.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •