Random Christianity Discussion

[Milkster]

You're jumping on Tagus' throat way too fast. Instead of hitting reply right away, try to spend 5 minutes trying to understand what he meant instead of throwing a fit or argue about genetics.

Tagus isn't talking about "evolution" in the traditional sense of the term. What he is trying to say is that our society also "evolve" in a way that is beneficial to our race. Basically, if religion survived for as long as it did, and is as present in every corner of the world, maybe it's because it's beneficial, in a strict practical term, to mankind.

The principle of least action guide evolution and pretty much everything in this world that is subject to statistics. Religion might be the most efficient way to make our society happy and productive, and making an argument against that is difficult considering we have very few examples of the opposite in history.

Which would mean slavery, sex trafficing, oppression, genocide, murder, rape, etc are all acceptable and beneficial because they've been around for so long and are prevalent through out the world!

[Siatdiat]

I'm not saying anything... I'm asking why you think religion exists.

Does it seem mysterious why religions exist? Religions sprouted up across the earth, all different from each other. We had almost no real understanding of how anything worked. Religious belief was built off of superstition and misinterpreted coincidence. The more we learn and understand as a species, the more superfluous religion becomes. The number of non-believers is only going to rise. I don't think anyone needs to actively battle religion, it is doomed. I do however think we need to battle religion when it invades our society through our government and in public schools.

[Demosthenes11]

You're jumping on Tagus' throat way too fast. Instead of hitting reply right away, try to spend 5 minutes trying to understand what he meant instead of throwing a fit or argue about genetics.

Tagus isn't talking about "evolution" in the traditional sense of the term. What he is trying to say is that our society also "evolve" in a way that is beneficial to our race. Basically, if religion survived for as long as it did, and is as present in every corner of the world, maybe it's because it's beneficial, in a strict practical term, to human.

The principle of least action guide evolution and pretty much everything in this world that is subject to statistics. Religion might be the most efficient way to make our society happy and productive, and making an argument against that is difficult considering we have very few examples of the opposite in our history.

how come greed hasn't been naturally selected out? Physical violence? Calling people names? Racism? Ignorance?

And even if this all were shit that adheres to traditional natural selection, religion as we know it has been around for about 4k years. I'm pretty sure there are trees older than that. 4k years is almost literally nothing in the history of evolution and natural selection.

[RKenshin]

I'm not saying anything... I'm asking why you think religion exists.

Religion is and probably always will exist on some level because most people can't/won't/don't want to acknowledge the alternative.

And in reality, it makes perfect sense.

The alternative to it all being BS can be scary, depressing, insignificant, boring, trivializing and more all at the same time.

Most people are scared to death of the idea that once you die, that's it. You cease to exist. No "happily united with loved ones", no ultimate enlightenment, no beauty, no answers, no nothing. Your mind, your body, your everything is gone.

Most people all wish for some level of immortality, and all wish we were more important than just another insignificant living being in the universe no more unique or special than a cockroach. We want to be special, we want to be different, and we want to be unique.

And as long as all of that is true, people will have faith in or at the very least hope for it, which is typically exercised through religion.

[Acturus]

For Tagus:

http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_ha...scendence.html

Also, still love me some TED talks.

[Siatdiat]

For Tagus:

http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_ha...scendence.html

Also, still love me some TED talks.

Should have put up some Daniel Dennett from TED.

[hey]

refusing the spoon-fed bullshit

Fyi, not believing bullshit doesn't mean we try to prove all bullshit false.

Trying to disprove god is pointless. It cannot be done. There's no reason to try. If you don't have proof of your claims, then they have no more value than claims that the easter bunny, santa claus or invisible pink unicorns are real. If there was at least a bit of evidence, then it might be worth considering. But there's not, so there's no reason to even consider the possibility that a god exists.

[Pirian]

I'm not saying anything... I'm asking why you think religion exists.

[Tagus]

Much like your astonishingly unlettered analysis of natural selection, the question can only be answered if you bother to find out on your own time. These aren't questions that can be answered in a forum post in any coherent manner. You are literally describing entire fields of psychology, anthropology, and sociology. Go to the library and learn something.

But I'll give you the skeleton of an answer anyway.

- Religion is our first attempt at rationalization, philosophy, science, etc.
- Group instincts, ingroup cohesion, groupthink, etc, are native to humans as a social species that has survived due to our cohesion and organization. Inclusion is a driving force behind human behavior.
- Religion is the simplest and oldest control structure that we have, and is a remarkably primitive one.
- Look at the massive parallels between religious dogma and organization and the functioning of tyrannical states, dictatorships, and the master/slave relationship. They are virtually identical.
- Ergo, religion is inherently anti-freedom and destructively conformist. It is no longer necessary in today's world, and should be undesirable to any educated person.

Thanks... the TED video was great as well. I was looking for some sense of how the concepts of religion could even fit into a world controlled by natural selection, and that did well to explain it.

[Kaylia]

Which would mean slavery, sex trafficing, oppression, genocide, murder, rape, etc are all acceptable and beneficial because they've been around for so long and are prevalent through out the world!

how come greed hasn't been naturally selected out? Physical violence? Calling people names? Racism? Ignorance?

There is a big difference between what is promoted by the society, and the individual actions of its people. It's rare for a society to promote murder, violence and thing like this. It's actually something that is punished and repressed more often than not, and it's easy to understand why.

If you're comparing "society vs society", then yes, racism is a damn good way to strengthen the tie among the people of the same group. It's a behavior that can be observed everywhere in the nature when individual of the same species are grouped together. Is it the best way? Probably not, and that's why human generally try to avoid conflict.

And even if this all were shit that adheres to traditional natural selection, religion as we know it has been around for about 4k years. I'm pretty sure there are trees older than that. 4k years is almost literally nothing in the history of evolution and natural selection.

What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with the natural selection of genes.

Many societies have come and gone over the last 4000 years. It's not a lot of time to see the evolution of genetics, but it's plenty of time to observes the evolution of society.

[Ashmada]

Mah turn to feed teh troll!

Kaylia: mebbe they jumpin' at his throat because:
1) Argument was unsound and not everyone is bored enough to explain why (fortunately, I am).
2) Tone was deliberately provocative (eh trollan').

You know what I wonder about sometimes? How is it exactly that Athiests reason away the existence of religion as a whole? Darwinism and the scientific concepts surrounding natural selection as the dominant force in our world don't allow for unnecessary or stupid things. Smart survives, stupid dies. It's a very simple set of rules. In a purely logical sense, Athiesm assumes that religious gods are a stupid concept because it assumes they don't exist. However, they persist in our culture and every other culture in the world. The concepts of natural selection therefore demand that they have value to survival, and therefore value to us as a species. Is it the community in general that gives religion it's staying power? If so, how has it not died out entirely over the past two thousand years? Religious community runs counter to any concept of innate gene pool diversification, as people of similar religions tend to choose like-minded mates, and shun those different from them...

See where I'm going with this? The very existence of religion runs counter to every reasonable Atheist concept. Is that why you guys hate it so much? Or is it just human nature to criticize things that are different from ourselves, and you're just walking down the ignorant road that so many have tread before you?

How is it exactly that monothiests reason away the existence of atheism/polytheism (take your pick, works with both) as a whole? Darwinism and the scientific concepts surrounding natural selection as the dominant force in our world don't allow for unnecessary or stupid things. Smart survives, stupid dies.

It's a very simple set of rules. In a purely logical sense, monotheism assumes that the absence of/existence of multiple religious gods are stupid concepts because it assumes a single god exists. However, they persist in our culture and every other culture in the world. The concepts of natural selection therefore demand that they have value to survival, and therefore value to us as a species. Is it the community in general that gives atheism/non-monotheist religion it's staying power? If so, how has it not died out entirely over the past two thousand years? [...]

Incorrect series of shortcuts in reasoning are incorrect.

[Demosthenes11]

What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with the natural selection of genes, Tagus was simply using evolution as an analogy.

Many societies have come and gone over the last 4000 years. It's not a lot of time to see the evolution of genetics, but it's plenty of time to observes the evolution of society.

I wasn't aware "On the original of species" was written about societal progress and change.

And yes, that's exactly what Tagus is talking about. Unless he is claiming social darwinism is central tenant of nonbelievers, which is ridiculous in itself.

No, I'm not interested in having a big conversation with you.

[Sera]

There is a big difference between what is promoted by the society, and the individual actions of its people. It's rare for a society to promote murder, violence and thing like this. It's actually something that is punished and repressed more often than not, and it's easy to understand why.

If you're comparing "society vs society", then yes, racism is a damn good way to strengthen the tie among the people of the same group. It's a behavior that can be observed everywhere in the nature when individual of the same species are grouped together. Is it the best way? Probably not, and that's why human generally try to avoid conflict.





What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with the natural selection of genes.

Many societies have come and gone over the last 4000 years. It's not a lot of time to see the evolution of genetics, but it's plenty of time to observes the evolution of society.

Why am I not shocked at all by this post coming from this author

[Kaylia]

I wasn't aware "On the original of species" was written about societal progress and change.

And yes, that's exactly what Tagus is talking about. Unless he is claiming social darwinism is central tenant of nonbelievers, which is ridiculous in itself.

No, I'm not interested in having a big conversation with you.

Everything is in my first post, but you're unable to read apparently.

Beside, just ask Tagus if my interpretation of his post on last page is more accurate than your.

[Demosthenes11]

Theists always say how "obsessed" nonbelievers are with evolution / natural selection / darwinism. That statement has nothing to do with social darwinism - they are different concepts. Nobody talks about how obsessed nonbelievers are with social darwnism.

Either Tagus is really dumb or really dumb.

QED

[Kaylia]

Why am I not shocked at all by this post coming from this author

Good old personal attack when applying logic to your thinking is too difficult.

[ronin sparthos]

Religion is and probably always will exist on some level because most people can't/won't/don't want to acknowledge the alternative.

And in reality, it makes perfect sense.

The alternative to it all being BS can be scary, depressing, insignificant, boring, trivializing and more all at the same time.

Most people are scared to death of the idea that once you die, that's it. You cease to exist. No "happily united with loved ones", no ultimate enlightenment, no beauty, no answers, no nothing. Your mind, your body, your everything is gone.

Most people all wish for some level of immortality, and all wish we were more important than just another insignificant living being in the universe no more unique or special than a cockroach. We want to be special, we want to be different, and we want to be unique.

And as long as all of that is true, people will have faith in or at the very least hope for it, which is typically exercised through religion.

If the requirements to enter heaven were to be curious, highly intelligent, inquisitive, respectful to all life and be an overall swell fellow none of us would be here complaining and the world would be a better place for it.

The problem isn't religion (belief in a higher entity or entities) moreso the current flavors people choose to follow.

[Sera]

Good old personal attack when applying logic to your thinking is too difficult.

Lol. Not really a personal attack unless you're willing to admit your post was stupid. I simply said I was not shocked that you were the author of that post.


In my eyes, you and Moosey are the same person.

[Kaylia]

Theists always say how "obsessed" nonbelievers are with evolution / natural selection / darwinism. That statement has nothing to do with social darwinism - they are different concepts. Nobody talks about how obsessed nonbelievers are with social darwnism.

Either Tagus is really dumb or really dumb.

QED

That's not what he said. He pointed the irony that atheists constantly want to "weed out" religion because its "useless", when it was an integral part of most societies over the course of mankind history.

It doesn't make it correct, but I don't think that's what his post implied. He simply stated that religion might have persisted for so long because it has its uses.

[Yugl]

If the requirements to enter heaven were to be curious, highly intelligent, inquisitive, respectful to all life and be an overall swell fellow none of us would be here complaining and the world would be a better place for it.

The problem isn't religion (belief in a higher entity or entities) moreso the current flavors people choose to follow.

This. If religion consisted of going to some broken down building once every week and singing stupid songs, I don't think the issue is as severe as most perceive. The minimum for being "religious" isn't that high. I even hesitate to make that claim because it implies that religious is a binary fact when it's really a spectrum.

Edit: And I know some dumbass is going to come in here and say "YUGL SINGING ISN'T RELIGION!". I'm going to preempt that with "No shit dumbass; that's not the claim" for now.