Well, I think it’s a point worth remembering, is all. The gap between ourselves and other animals is not as great as we might like to pretend it is, for both good and bad.
Actually, I agree that the whole “Does the wolf worship?” argument is fairly silly. Humans do lots of things wolves don’t, again, for both good and bad. We don’t model our behavior on that of wolves, nor should we. And, as has been pointed out, for all we know wolves do worship–maybe they worship the Moon, for example. Also, wolves are (presumably) ignorant of the facts that matter is made of atoms and that they themselves have evolved from non-wolves, yet those facts are no less true, whether or not wolves happen to know about them.
Religion is complex behaviour derived from our propensity to form ourselves into social groups (you do not need religion to have a community with mutually beneficial values) and belief. Belief is simply a derivation of the human mind’s ability to form abstract thought and construct hypotheses, which itself was an evolutionary adaptation that gave us a distinct competitive advantage in problem solving.
Faith in a God is a convenient solution to fill the gaps in our universe that we cannot see or understand, helping people deal with their personal insecurities. However, it is almost certain that our current perception of the Universe is incorrect (and it is certainly incomplete). Future religions will arise and evolve as our perception changes until we have no more questions to answer.
It seems naïve that just because we cannot understand or determine the reason for our existence, we should assume it to be at the design of some higher intelligence or discrete entity.
If blind faith works for you in helping you feel better about yourself, the world you live in or your prospects when reaching the end of your biological life then indulge yourself. But it does not make your, or any other, religion ‘right’, in the sense that it is an accurate model of human existence.
I hate to be a prick (though that fact hasn’t stopped me yet), but:
What in this context constitutes being a “religion”?
What in this context constitutes “being wrong”?
Something that makes no claims cannot manage to be “wrong,” as nothing has been asserted. I have the impression that there are some “disciplines” which are sometimes called religions, but which assert no doctrine about reality. They simply say “Find out!”, which is not an assertion but an imperative. (I’m thinking of meditative disciplines.)
BUT–if being a religion implies that some positive doctrine must be put forward–I am not aware of any such religion that could not possibly be in error.
As far as “God either does or does not exist”…whereas I wouldn’t go so far as to require a complete definition of the subject, one has to know that subject+predicate has some conjoint meaning. "X&%*^# either does or does not exist" has no truth value whatever unless we posit that X&%*^# is the sort of posit-able that can possibly bear “existing” or “not existing” as a characterization.
Don’t assume that “every anything whatever” can be meaningfully said to “exist or not exist.” NONEXISTENCE cannot exist; EXISTENCE cannot not exist. “THE NONEXISTENT EXISTENCE” cannot do either one, I presume.
I’m sorry, but I disagree that things like schools and hospitals are vain or pointless. Improving the quality of life, and expanding our knowledge are worth while pursuits and make life better for all of us, even the non human animals.
The abilities to use logic and reason, to think of the long term consequences of our actions, to develop morals, values, principals, ethics and scruples, to read and write…all these, and other abilities don’t create a great gap between us and non human animals?
How about this, our understanding of religions and their deities is incomplete and sometimes inaccurate, but just because we live in a natural world, governed by natural laws, doesn’t mean that we are the be all and end all. There are all sorts of possibilities for the existence “higher beings”. I myself am Christian, but don’t believe in a “mystical” God and spiritual beings. I tend to lean towards the idea of “spirits” being inhabitants of the fourth and/or higher dimension (spatial dimensions, not time) but that’s a whole other subject, so I’ll shut up now
All religions are not wrong.
My religion is golf. Golf definitely exists, I played it the other day.
On a serious note, I think that anyone who believes everything that is written in the Bible or the Quran has a screw loose.
They are both great novels written around the themes of commonly accepted values.
Thou shalt not kill. Pretty logical, its no revelation.
My brother recites the bible like it is a factual manual to life, and he has a very high IQ. But that doesn’t mean he’s not brain-washed and manipulated.
I believe there is a force up there, some kind of mathematically-explainable natural phenomenon. Gravity, if you like.
I believe what comes around, goes around. So that is my God, if you will.
Christianity and Islam are two examples of movements that are designed to instill fear and control in the masses.
Buddhism is the closest thing to an enlightened thought following we have today.
All religions are not wrong.
My religion is golf. Golf definitely exists, I played it the other day.
On a serious note, I think that anyone who believes everything that is written in the Bible or the Quran has a screw loose.
They are both great novels written around the themes of commonly accepted values.
Thou shalt not kill. Pretty logical, its no revelation.
My brother recites the bible like it is a factual manual to life, and he has a very high IQ. But that doesn’t mean he’s not brain-washed and manipulated.
I believe there is a force up there, some kind of mathematically-explainable natural phenomenon. Gravity, if you like.
I believe what comes around, goes around. So that is my God, if you will.
Christianity and Islam are two examples of movements that are designed to instill fear and control in the masses.
Buddhism is the closest thing to an enlightened thought following we have today.
Wow Bambam, people of religious faith are brainwashed and manipulated huh? I guess that the only people who think clearly and logically are those who think like you, right?
Wow BamBam, so people of religious faith are brainwashed and manipulated, huh? I guess the only people who think clearly and logically are those who think like you, right?
Well, Joel, therein lies the problem with you religious folk.
I put my view up on the board, and you attack it.
I made the point that my brother is of high intelligence and is also a bible-basher. He thinks clearly and logically, just not the same way I do.
Furthermore, you do not know my brother. He is a very naive, gullible person, and in his case I believe he has been sucked in to a cultish sect of the Church called the Christian City Church. So yes I feel the terms brain-washed and manipulated are appropriate. For him. Maybe not for you. But I did not say ALL people who are religious have been brain-washed and manipulated.
In your case, I cannot comment as I don’t know you (nor do I want to). If you are religious for different reasons, i.e. you have irrefutable proof that it’s all true, then good luck to you.
And if your religion brings you joy, hope, and faith, then I recommend you continue to practice it.
And the beauty of the world is that people think all sorts of thinks (to quote Dr. Seuss), which creates discussion, interest, and passionate emotions. So fuck off and take a chill pill, Joel.
Uhm, I’m perfectly calm. But looking at your last, you’re the one who needs to chill out.
As for attacking, I didn’t attack your point of view, I simply responded to your attack of people with religious beliefs.
And since you’re denying that you’re attacking people with religious beliefs and that I took your comment about your brother out of context, then, how about when you said…
“Christianity and Islam are two examples of movements that are designed to instill fear and control in the masses.”
Uhm, excuse me, but who’s doing the attacking exactly?
Oh, and nice way to start off your last post by using the words “you religious folk”. If I debating gay people and said something like “That’s the problem with you homosexuals” or if I was debating a race issue and said “That’s the problem with you blacks” I would be seen as a homophobe or racist. Your anti religious bias is clearly showing through here.
And I believe that sentiments such as the last one you expressed to me are only allowed in the BBQ Pit.
Wolves have ‘morals, values, principals, ethics and scruples’ - maybe they are not the same as yours, and maybe they exist on more of an instinctive level, but they certainly have a code of behavior that they follow. They use logic and reason - how else do you think they manage to plan a cooperative hunt? They can’t ‘read’ and ‘write’ in human fashion - but they are certainly able to communicate with each other (see ‘cooperative hunt’, above), they can ‘read’ information from their environment, and they leave ‘messages’ for other wolves by urinating and defecating in certain spots, by scratching the ground, by leaving scent marks on trees, etc. We don’t know if they are able to consider long-term consequences or not, because they may consider them and make a decision that humans don’t understand - and we don’t have any way to ask them.
Sure, there’s a ‘gap’ between humans and other animals - but it’s a matter of degree, not of ability. We just happen to have developed a bigger, more complex brain with which to do the same things the other animals are doing.
I can probably even find a cite, if the articles are still online somewhere.
Uhm, for your information, it WAS an honest mistake. I WASN’T making any “dig”. And I said NOTHING about being holier than anybody.
Oh, and by the way, we’re in the Great Debates forum. We’re here to debate, not to resort to name calling.
Joel, you correctly deciphered that I have an anti-religious bias.
Sorry about the name calling – your righteous approach just really pissed me off. I’ll graciously accept your forgiveness on that issue.
All debates have a bias, there is always a “pro” and a “con” side to each debate.
P.S. My brother and I are very close, and have huge rows with eachother on this topic… hey, it takes all types!
