I am not about to defend the crimes and abuses perpetrated in the name of a religion, any more than I’d defend those committed in the name of a nation. Indeed, the evolutionary psychologist whose lectures I listened to had much to say about the self-reinforcing links between religion and warfare. I merely argue that religious adherence is understandable and, from an evolutionary standpoint, logical.
And point out that just like every other human institution, religions can be helpful or harmful. The Roman Catholic Church sheltered hundreds of pedophile priests. It also runs the largest charitable healthcare system in the world. Is the Catholic Church good or evil? Yes.
Humanity if full of irrationality which is logical from the evolutionary viewpoint. Territoriality, tribalism, lust, the endowment effect. For the most part we try to understand why we feel these things and work around or redirect them. We can redirect irrational love of a tribe to love for a sports team, which won’t hurt much of anything except perhaps some marriages. Only in religion does society consider the irrationality good all the time. Only with religion are the rational people hated.
IMHO, it’s just another “emergent property” of an otherwise soulless universe. But wow: it’s frigging awesome that basically, the stuff of rocks and energy when put together just right, can create a subjective experience! Imagine me doing my best Bill (and Ted) “Whoa!”
If it were possible to have an intelligence that can analyze deeply but without any subjective experience (that is, an unconscious intelligence) and that intelligence carefully studied life, processing, the brain – without our talking about it, would it ever even imagine the quality that experience has? Would it come up with the concept of qualia (the way we experience sensations: the “redness” we experience for light of a certain wavelength)? It could predict a speedy reaction to pain, but would it have any concept of how much pain hurts?
I really don’t know. I think it’s absurd that anything exists at all, and I think that any attempt to explain the existence of existence is bound to fail in circular logic. Put philosophically, “shit happens.” Consciousness is just the tip of the shit iceberg, to mix a bad metaphor.
Well, look at it from their side. It’s difficult to have a reasonable discussion when one side can invoke logic!
Most people for either subject are laymen anwyway. So how can one have an intelligent discussion that concerns both with laymen? Usually they may have some knowledge on one or the other but not always both unless it’s something that really interests them enough to dwell into each a lot.
I’m no layman when it comes to magic! My magic is stronger and better than anyone else’s magic and I can perform more miracles than that of any religion in the world that claims miracles.
But I choose not to prove it, because I WILL NOT BE TESTED!
