Epicmafia

almost 10 years

projectmatt says

Religion doesn't provide morality. At least, religion isn't required -for- a sense of morality. Regardless of your opinion on religion though, I would argue that it actually is highly useful for at the very least a sense of comfort. You can call it weak or unintelligent, but that doesn't change that it actually -is- important. Being in a universe where nothing exists is a very, very terrifying prospect for people.

1. It's weak and unintelligent.
2. It's really not debilitatingly terrifying, especially once you educate yourself on the implications of atheism/agnosticism.
3. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7949111.stm

deletedalmost 10 years

i just went to a rosary mass for my grandaunt and the weight of prayers was torture. am i possessed?

deletedalmost 10 years

i am not sirius wtf

deletedalmost 10 years

atheism isn't much more than faith in death

projectmatt

almost 10 years

belovedprincess says

matt be religious dw about it dude. i'm really smart and ur right :)

alright sirius

deletedalmost 10 years

good ole jesus fighting backing the fires of unbound existential consideration

deletedalmost 10 years

matt be religious dw about it dude. i'm really smart and ur right :)

deletedalmost 10 years

allahu akbar

projectmatt

almost 10 years

They aren't what caused the development of religion, but religion has always tried to answer "why?".

As the questions of "what is fire?, "why is it raining?" and such were answered, the questions turned more existential.

Interesting point about conditioning, but I honestly don't think that humans need conditioning to be inherently attracted to religion as a prospect. The answers of "why am I here?" are far more comforting for many than they are without one

deletedalmost 10 years

Thing is, those philosophical existential questions aren't what caused the development of religion in the first place. They're all comparatively modern phenomena. The example of people who are happy because they "do God's work", via charity, soft proselytism, etc, is one often cited as an example of why religion is needed - it makes people happy. The problem is, those people find that as a route to happiness because they have been conditioned to do so, and thus could've easily been conditioned to find happiness through any number of alternate means.

projectmatt

almost 10 years

Lashka says

And the questions that needed answering back then with religious explanations are easily explained by Science these days too. "What is Lightning?", "What is Fire?", "Is Winter coming?" etc.

Right. But they couldn't explain it or understand it back then, so they asked "why" and therefore, a large amount of myths were created by man to explain those things. I'm making the point that religion answers the "why am i here?" and "what is my purpose?" inherent with everyone

projectmatt

almost 10 years

Lashka says

Organized religion is very different to the early polytheistic divine explanations. If you grow up in a cave away from any other religious person, you do not come out of it a Theist in any sense of the word, though you could plausibly come out a pantheist. Monotheism in particular is an entirely artificial creation, as it developed much much later and was pushed by certain individuals rather than a natural formation.

I've been studying the concept of Monotheism coming artificially, but I'm not sure if I agree with you yet so I'll refrain from commenting.

My primary point though is that, throughout the ages, religion has still set out to answer the questions of "why?" that everybody asks. The questions have grown on a larger scale as time has gone by

deletedalmost 10 years

And the questions that needed answering back then with religious explanations are easily explained by Science these days too. "What is Lightning?", "What is Fire?", "Is Winter coming?" etc.

deletedalmost 10 years

Organized religion is very different to the early polytheistic divine explanations. If you grow up in a cave away from any other religious person, you do not come out of it a Theist in any sense of the word, though you could plausibly come out a pantheist. Monotheism in particular is an entirely artificial creation, as it developed much much later and was pushed by certain individuals rather than a natural formation.

projectmatt

almost 10 years

Lashka says

And I'm pointing out that the "need" for religion is conditioned by the religions themselves from an early age.

well, presuming that religion was created by a non divine inspiration, it's safe to assume largely the reason it was written was to explain things and the nature of the universe. there's a lot of stories through various religions that attempt to explain why the human language, storms and other natural phenomena occur before anybody had the scientific knowledge to know "why". people also like feeling as though they have a strong sense of purpose and they want a -loving- creator. as such, i think that the need of religion comes from humanity and not the other way around

deletedalmost 10 years

Thing is, if you actually delve into the religious "Why's" most of them boil down to "It just is" or "God made it so" which are just as utterly unsatisfying as the Scientific answers.

projectmatt

almost 10 years

Rondar says

Er, or not. I'm gonna go now I'll be back tonight.

No, I am.

deletedalmost 10 years

And I'm pointing out that the "need" for religion is conditioned by the religions themselves from an early age.

Rondar

almost 10 years

Er, or not. I'm gonna go now I'll be back tonight.

Rondar

almost 10 years

Lashka says

Science comes up with better answers than Religion in 95% of cases so that's sort of a null point, as it actually favours militant atheism more than it favours theism.

I think Matt is referring to the "why" behind the more existential questions: Why am I here? Why is there consistency in this? etc...

projectmatt

almost 10 years

Lashka says

Science comes up with better answers than Religion in 95% of cases so that's sort of a null point, as it actually favours militant atheism more than it favours theism.

Well, that's debatable. I'm making the point that some people literally need theism and thrive from it, because it gives them a strong sense of purpose and self worth that wouldn't be found elsewhere.

Rondar

almost 10 years

Lashka says

As a mildly religious person, I can safely say the only "need" for religion is created by the religions themselves. That doesn't make religion bad, but it's a choice. Not a requirement.

C'est vrai..

deletedalmost 10 years

Science comes up with better answers than Religion in 95% of cases so that's sort of a null point, as it actually favours militant atheism more than it favours theism.

Rondar

almost 10 years

Peta says

I really hate this excuse. You're about to say that religion provides (1) community and (2) morality. Both are attainable by other (better) means.

The essential thing it provides for many is a sense of purpose and self - for many truly unattainable through other means.

projectmatt

almost 10 years

Lashka says

As a mildly religious person, I can safely say the only "need" for religion is created by the religions themselves. That doesn't make religion bad, but it's a choice. Not a requirement.

If there wasn't a heavy need for people to inherently question "why" things are the way they are, I would argue that religion really wouldn't be as widespread as it is. It's a pretty huge part of human nature to question and to also come up with answers. Not a requirement though, yes.

ISIS