I see what you’re saying, but plenty of people have been hurt in the name of science, too. Eugenics in particular comes to mind. It opened to door for a whole world of hurt for many, many people. I don’t know how many were harmed by eugenics vs. religion, but people can twist logic and use flawed science to come to any conclusion they want.
For example, the guy who “proved” that vaccines caused autism was almost single-handedly responsible for a huge movement that has caused otherwise educated people to avoid vaccinating their kids, which results in decreased immunities, increased illnesses and potential death, presumably so that one scientist could profit from his relationship with a bunch of attorneys.
Religion isn’t evil. Science isn’t evil. Some people are evil. Both religion and science can be used to convince yourself and others that evil is okay.
I think it’s a good thing when someone learns they’ve been investing a lot of time and energy, an in the case of religion – money, on an incorrect idea.
I;m not talking about hammering at their beliefs over and over again over a long period of time, which would be a huge waste of MY time, but if you could sit someone down and over the course of an hour or two, talk them out of their delusion, it’s win win.
I wouldn’t do it because I don’t care enough or have enough energy to try. However, if it were easy, sure I’d take god away. And probably be thanked for it.
No but it illustrates the point beautifully!
Some people feel the need to believe in gods and religions, and just because we don’t doesn’t mean they don’t. Whether it’s ridiculous or not to us doesn’t matter. It’s not our belief.
I personally think it’s silly how so many people believe in ghosts. I have a very clever, educated best friend who loves those moronic ghost hunter shows and truly believes there must be some sort of “imprint” left behind to wreak havoc with all this negative energy. She doesn’t believe in gods or religions but she thinks ghosts exist. I don’t know why she feels the need to believe in ghosts. Maybe she holds some hope that her older brother who died years ago may still be able to contact her one day. Maybe she hopes to be a ghost after her physical body dies. Maybe she thinks she’s seen one and this allows her a measure of comfort. We can talk all day about how there’s really no evidence of the existence of ghosts, but she has found something to believe in and has enough evidence for her own belief.
I’ve noticed a lot of believers of various things claim to have had “experiences”. Otherwise intelligent people who, one day out of the blue tell you they’ve had an experience, and their experience somehow proves to them that whatever it is they now believe in is clearly real. I belong to a great little board originally based on religious beliefs. We manage to have great conversations on the topic without the snark and condescension simply by recognizing that we can’t know everything. What we call ghosts may very well be some sort of energy we don’t yet understand. I doubt it personally, but who knows? I certainly don’t know everything. However I do know enough to have decided I don’t believe in ghosts. Or gods.
As for me, I’m absolutely certain that the god I grew up believing in doesn’t exist and I’ve seen enough evidence to cancel out any other god idea I’ve considered. That’s why I’m atheist. And I guess aghostist? I’m sure there’s a real term for that one but damned if I can come up with one.
But it doesn’t hurt me to know that my Mig and my best friends have beliefs in things I am certain are not true. We just talk about different things. If either of them became obsessed then maybe it would become a concern but otherwise they are welcome to their spiritual beliefs. It might do me no good but it apparently does something for them. I have no need whatsoever to proselytize, and in fact find it annoying regardless or the belief or opinion. I don’t find the need to push other things I don’t believe in, so why would I push people not to believe in their gods?
I don’t really do arguments. They never lead to anything productive. Occasionally my SO and I will argue out of frustration about who was supposed to refill the tea pitcher (because you should never leave less than a glass full! That’s just rude!) but if we both just try to be kind and respectful the pitcher will remain at a satisfactory level. We’re both in charge of maintaining that atmosphere.
And well they should! Because that’s what has happened, has it not? Do you think they’d just give it up without complaint? It would be taken away from them.
Not everyone who believes in gods give away their money, but so what if they did? It’s their entertainment fund. If they are being entertained it’s not my business.
And it’s NOT win/win if, upon discovering that their fantasy afterlife isn’t true, it causes them pain. I know when it finally hit me I became distressed, then depressed, then resigned. It took me almost twenty years to finally be comfortable with the idea that this is it. I wanted nothing more than to be with my family when I die and upon the realization that I’d never see my mother again in any shape or form it hit me so hard. And that desperate search to prove to myself I was wrong, that there really was a god in Heaven who loved me and had my best interests at heart; that fruitless, desperate search just about killed me. So no, it’s not win/win for some people.
You simply must look at the other side, step in the other person’s shoes and acknowledge that their beliefs may really help them before you pride yourself on ripping them apart. Otherwise you’re just being selfish so don’t try to pat yourself on the back as though you’ve *saved *someone.
None of that was real science. They just made things up and called it science. There are much better examples of science used for evil, such as modern weapons.
Still, there’s a difference. Science is amoral, it’s a tool. Religion is actively destructive; and it’s a user as much as it’s a tool. The believers are the tools, tools for spreading the religion and for whomever has declared themselves the representative of the gods.
That’s typical. Criticizing religion is taboo, so instead we are supposed to demonize humanity. That is just another aspect of how religion is fundamentally anti-human.
Yes, it IS win/win. Being scammed is a bad thing. Being deprived of your money to finance a scam is a bad thing. Plenty of scam victims are happy while being scammed and unhappy when the truth comes out; does that make the cops bad when they crack down on a scam artist?
Thanks for the links! I stand corrected with respect to the autism issue.
I still don’t know what it would accomplish to “take god away,” though, provided said religious person wasn’t harming anyone. I’m not trying to be dense, but what is the person expected to do with that knowledge? Other than an Oh Moment, what’s the point?
It’s like me telling someone I’ve got a dingleberry on my butt. If I go around at a party telling people that, what do they do with that information once they believe me (other than beg me not to tell them)?
I think that the reasons for morality/morally good behavior follow a very simple three step process.
1.) I do what is right because I fear what will happen to me when I fail to do right.
2.) I do what is right in the hope of receiving a reward for my good deeds.
3.) I do what is right, because it is the right thing to do. The carrot and stick are obsolete.
I sincerely believe that this is the reader’s digest version of how all people learn to live morally. I loosely compare the progression to grade school, then high school, then college. I think of religion, in an admittedly grossly oversimplified fashion. It is a cattle chute, comprised of sticks and carrots that was designed over the course of thousands of years to direct the activities of large numbers of people from a distance.
I think that people give up the carrots and sticks when they’re ready to give them up. Some people enjoy being disciplined. Some people enjoy being rewarded. I see these people as the lifelong attenders of churches, synagogues, mosques, etc…
Ultimately, a person has the right to delude themselves in whatever way they deem appropriate. Is it inherently logical? No - it absolutely isn’t. It is not inherently destructive either. People can attempt to apply a broken logic to it, and they can use the carrots and sticks toward destructive ends, but the institution itself isn’t any more broken than the men who invented it, and continue to administer it.
For Der Trihs, what I can’t fix because of the stupid edit time limit:
And this is where I generally end the conversation because it becomes more like an argument with the extreme examples.
But look, it’s like this. I find Christmas lights and other yard decorations annoying and wasteful but I don’t spend every year arguing with my (Christian Catholic) SO wants to cover our yard and turn the things on every single night from Thanksgiving until whatever it is those Catholics celebrate in January. It’s his entertainment funds, not mine. I also don’t bitch when I find lottery stubs in his pants pockets. He’s more than his little traditions and fairy tales to me and I know him like I know myself, and I KNOW he finds great joy in his beliefs, and the only money he spends is what he uses to feed some of his homeless friends. He doesn’t go to church, he doesn’t send in a tithe. He just has this faith. I can’t understand it, not the way his life has been. He’s had a hellish life; I can’t understand anyone believing in any higher power that picks and chooses prayers to answer (der he always answers; it’s just sometimes “no”). I can see he finds strength in it. I don’t get it, but I don’t have to. He’s a good guy with a god belief. Why mess with the formula?
Prevent them from harming others, or themselves. Arguments like yours are built on the presumption that religion is harmless by default, which it isn’t. It warps judgment, corrodes morality, instigates and justifies cruelty and hatred. Removing religion from someone will make them a better person, because religion is a defect. It makes them safer, because religion makes people dangerous to themselves and others.
Note: can we dispense with the “religion and science and are incompatible”. Or rather, the implication that because a person is religious, they reject all science. Because we know that’s bullshit. Okay?
(Note: I’m not talking about the notion of gods themselves existing. More along the lines of, does believing in a god mean you reject things like evolution, germ theory, the Big Bang, blah blah blah)
But they are incompatible. Because of its dedication to illogic and due to simply being wrong about everything, religion is an intellectual poison. It ruins anything it touches; the only way religious people can function at all in anything involving real-world matters is by preventing their religion from touching it by intellectual compartmentalization. As for science, the habits of thought required for science are poisonous to religion, as are the facts it discovers.
Bottom line; religion is incompatible with everything, including science.
BAH! You are saying that people can put their rationality on standby to engage in religion and vice-versa. Fine. I can put scuba diving on standby so I can whistle a tune. They don’t go well together, but neither hurts my ability to engage in either.
You might think that being irrational hurts one’s propensity for rationality, but I think rationality is only bounded by irrationality.
-personal opinion.
My point was, let’s not assume that people who are religious DON’T believe in science, okay? Not all religious people are creationists, or reject the Big Bang, blah blah blah. Stop with your fucking stereotypes.
THAT was my point. You can argue about religion itself, but don’t say that “if you are religious you automatically reject ALL scientific beliefs/truth/theories, etc.” Because that’s fucking bullshit, you KNOW it’s fucking bullshit, and it’s fucking insulting.