I’m not talking about whether you are interested in sports or religions.
I’m wondering about the impact on society as a whole.
It seems to me that they have a lot in common:
They tap into some basic human needs and desires.
They can elicit strong emotional responses.
They can unite and divide people.
They are passed on from generation to generation (to a large extent).
They depend (to a large extent) on geography.
They usually have a hierarchical structure.
There are many choices.
Obviously, there are reasons why sports and religions exist, and persist. But, which one has had the most positive effect on society? For me, this is a tough question: Religion has had *more * impact on society, some of it good. Sports has had less impact but “less bad” than the bad that has come from religion.
Also, if you could eliminate one (and only one), which one would you eliminate? I realize that one answer is: You can’t eliminate them. Even if you tried and thought that you succeeded, something else (which was functionally identically to sports and religions) would emerge.
In any case, I think that it’s an interesting topic.
(And, yeah, there’s the issue of all the variations of sports and religions, and the various levels of participation. Not sure how to deal with them.)
I personally have little use for either. But I would probably eliminate religion. I’m not aware of any wars being waged in the name of the Dallas Cowboys.
Religion. My tv shows have never been preempted because a mass ran too long. Oh, and when a church builds a new building, they only whine to their congregation and not taxpayers - and when a sports facility is used up, it’s a blight…
Really this is a fascinating question that won’t be taken seriously on this board. That’s a shame because it takes a lot of issues that get ground out in this forum several times a day, and casts them in an interesting light.
Oh well.
Here’s my take. I am a sports fan and not religious, but I’ll still say that religion is more important. Amongst religion’s many benefits is the fact that it gives moral direction to those who would otherwise lack it. I, and most other agnostics, have (or claim to have) a strong enough personal moral compass to make difficult decisions without consulting a central moral canon, but not everyone is that lucky.
I think therefore that if one institution were ripped out of this world – sport or religion – the loss of religion would do the greater damage. What would we lose if sports were taken away? An outlet for the reptilian parts of our minds, and a major social tool that brings people together more than it drives them apart. The former might be difficult to replace within the bounds of civilized society, but the latter already has substitutes lined up.
In comparison, the moral rubric provided by religion would be irreplaceable to those people who currently rely on it. Not to say that all religious people rely on religion for their own sense of morality – but then again not all sports fans rely on touch football to work out their aggression.
This analysis focuses on the benefit side of both, and you could do a separate analysis for the burden side (religion: religious wars – sports:waste and distraction). But I still think the benefits outweigh the burdens on both issues.
My response was one hundred percent serious; I think the question is a matter of individual utility. In my case, sports are useful. Religion is not. And I’m not even an atheist.
By your own analysis, religion should be tossed. Sports teaches us about The Rule of Law while religion teaches nebulous morality and appeasement to authority withour question.
That’s debateable, and has been more than once. And, even assuming that’s true, that ignores the question of whether it causes more immoral behavior than it prevents.
But where does your moral compass (logically) stem from? By removing a “higher power” from the equation, the only other explanation is that you are wired that way because natural selection decided that social groups of humans with an innate sense of altruism and morality survive better as a whole. Thus, your brain gets a “reward response” when helping others.
However, this is not the most beneficial route for an individual to take. In this case, the optimal course of action is to put up a facade of morality while secretly stealing from the community.
If that is true, why not just attempt to give up on your moral compass altogether, as a smoker would give up cigarettes?
Even though I think that religion has created problems, and I’m not religious, I agree with you.
And, I would say that those of us who don’t rely on it still rely on something that is at least peripherally related to a morality derived from (or perhaps intertwined with) religious beliefs. I’m not saying that those religious beliefs are necessary (or sufficient) for morality, but they are part of the morality in a predominantly theistic society.
Well, not over your pansy-ass American football, no.
But there was a Football War .
Personally, I could ditch both, but if I had to keep one and only one, I’d keep religion. I’d much rather have St. Pauls than Wembley, the Gita than Casey At The Bat, The Mission than The Mighty Ducks. And I’m a rabid atheist. Sure, religion did/does more bad shit. But sports, I have little time for.
And, 
.