Whats so good about religion?

[PLAYER57832]

Sorry, all Im reading is that people who defend religion are not even confident of their own answers.

Good day, sirs.

Hmm, your answer makes it clear you have not really read my posts... If you can figure out why I say that, fine. If not ... But enough trivia.

To answer your point .. and that of the previous post ... There is a difference between being sure of something and accepting the possibility that something might exist, hasn't been disproven. THAT is what science is about... disproving until all that remains is one possibility .. and accepting that anything one can't disprove might be possible in the mean time.

The universe and all it contains is greater than any human mind can contain. No? How about trying to figure out what started it all? .... Whether you believe in God or not, that is a mind-boggling question.

In science, recognizing what we DON'T know is just as important as understanding what we know. I believe, have all the proof I need, that God exists. In a religious sense, I do KNOW God exists. But, I don't try to lable that science ...

Religion isn't science, but it is part of life. (including the atheist option) I didn't marry because of scientific reasoning, I did not decide to have children because it was somehow logical ... nor did I even choose my career because it was logical. (DEFINITELY not that last! ... ask any natural scientist and most will tell you you have to be half crazy to go into the field ... )

Anyway, God is one of many things just unknown.

The beginning of wisdom is admitting that you don't know all the answers.....

[OnlyAmbrose]

Sorry, all Im reading is that people who defend religion are not even confident of their own answers.

Good day, sirs.

It's been a busy weekend so I haven't been able to do much more than skim this thread from time to time, but from what I've seen this is just one of many unsubstantial posts from Mr. SnakeySnakey.

[Dancing Mustard]

Sorry, all Im reading is that people who defend religion are not even confident of their own answers.

Good day, sirs.

It's been a busy weekend so I haven't been able to do much more than skim this thread from time to time, but from what I've seen this is just one of many unsubstantial posts from Mr. SnakeySnakey.

They have all been substantially witty.

[greenoaks]

I was so shit I once bowled the ball into the wrong net during practice. We'll put it that way, shall we?

well, at least you didn't confess to batting for the other side in a religious thread

[greenoaks]

PLAYER57382: why do you keep referring to God instead of the gods ?

and as i have already pointed out the aborigine's beliefs date back further in time than any other religious group on the planet. it is from this closer connection with the beginning of time that they know man was not created by your God but sprang from the body of the Rainbow Serpent.

it would appear that as some of the tribes migrated across our planet the connection between storytellers of one generation and the next was broken. the truth of our creation and that of our planet were lost to them. it is from this void your religion and God was created, much like Tolkien attempted to do for the British last century with Lord of the Rings.

[PLAYER57832]

PLAYER57382: why do you keep referring to God instead of the gods ?and as i have already pointed out the aborigine's beliefs date back further in time than any other religious group on the planet. it is from this closer connection with the beginning of time that they know man was not created by your God but sprang from the body of the Rainbow Serpent.it would appear that as some of the tribes migrated across our planet the connection between storytellers of one generation and the next was broken. the truth of our creation and that of our planet were lost to them. it is from this void your religion and God was created, much like Tolkien attempted to do for the British last century with Lord of the Rings.

I talk mostly about my personnal beliefs because that is what I know, including some contrasts and condradictions with others.  I am definitely not an expert in religion as a whole.  And, as I stated earlier, I am not trying to convince anyone that my religion is the way they should believe ... just not to blindly dismiss any of us who do believe in our various religions.

I certainly acknowledge the right of others to believe as they do.    And read with interest posts of others more knowledgeable about other religions.

As for the idea that Aborigines have the oldest religions .... many native americans, some "eastern" traditions, even some ancient european pagans dispute that claim, but I myself cannot argue either way, except to say that "Clovis First" was the accepted theory for settling the Americas, but now that is highly disputed.  Some actually say that the far south America was settled by Aboriginal Australians ... and look at similarities in rituals of a few tribes to Australian Aboriginal rites.   Again, I don't know enough to really discuss the ideas... I just mention them as a point of interest.  I leave it to the archeologists and anthropologists to sort it out.  I guess its pretty much "off thread" anyway...

[SnakeySnakey]

Science has always been the same from the start. Instead of being close minded to evolution, it is evolution. While religion, it changes its philosophy every day. Ever since before christ or buddha or moses or mohammad appeared, there were many old religions that people followed. New ones are still created as of this day, jsut to keep up with its time. All its been is a structure or backbone for a society at a certain point to behave. If you change religion, then its lost all its meaning.

You see just about year ago the catholics had stopped believing in purgatory. What is up with that? You cant do that and say everything else is still sacred. Then you got the holy wars. The bible and koran, pretty much violent on their own, caused that holy war. Guess what? Some people got smart enough to go "wait a second, killing is wrong." Unfortunately for the people that weren't smart, we still got that stupid mess over at the middle east. So instead of admitting there is a fault with their religious texts, or a contradiction, they either try to play it off as some fundamentalisms and continue to kill for their faiths, or some just try to deny the violent passages. You might as well call them "sacreligious heathens."

So good luck believing you omnipotent god, who's also pretty much a contradiction on its own.

[suggs]

Mini skirts seem to be back in.
God exists.

[t-o-m]

Mini skirts seem to be back in.
God exists.

of course!

[MR. Nate]

Science has always been the same from the start. Instead of being close minded to evolution, it is evolution. While religion, it changes its philosophy every day. Ever since before christ or buddha or moses or mohammad appeared, there were many old religions that people followed. New ones are still created as of this day, jsut to keep up with its time. All its been is a structure or backbone for a society at a certain point to behave. If you change religion, then its lost all its meaning.

You see just about year ago the catholics had stopped believing in purgatory. What is up with that? You cant do that and say everything else is still sacred. Then you got the holy wars. The bible and koran, pretty much violent on their own, caused that holy war. Guess what? Some people got smart enough to go "wait a second, killing is wrong." Unfortunately for the people that weren't smart, we still got that stupid mess over at the middle east. So instead of admitting there is a fault with their religious texts, or a contradiction, they either try to play it off as some fundamentalisms and continue to kill for their faiths, or some just try to deny the violent passages. You might as well call them "sacreligious heathens."

So good luck believing you omnipotent god, who's also pretty much a contradiction on its own.

I thought you were leaving, but I'll answer your issues anyway.

Just because there are competing religions doesn't invalidate them, it only invalidates one of the mutually exclusive one.
And I don't think the catholics got rid of purgatory, it was limbo, which was never accepted as doctrine.

You're taking texts and reading them from your point of view - "the Bible says do not kill, but there's lot's of killing" First, not all the killing is sanctioned by God. Second, when it is, it is specifically as punishment for ongoing, cultural or personal sin.

I don't deny that some so called followers of a number of religions (both true and untrue) do not follow all of their own tenets, but that does not invalidate the existence of God, instead, shouldn't you look more closely at those whose lives are consistent with their beliefs?

MeDeFe: As a pure naturalist, you would argue that everything should have a natural, physical explanation. In neuroscience it is a pretty well documented phenomena that if a conscious person has their physical brain stimulated in ways that cause physical reactions (moving their arm, moving their leg) they will respond with something like "Hey, I'm not doing that"
If there is nothing other than physical universe, the stimulation in their brain shouldn't cause that reaction.

[MeDeFe]

MeDeFe: As a pure naturalist, you would argue that everything should have a natural, physical explanation. In neuroscience it is a pretty well documented phenomena that if a conscious person has their physical brain stimulated in ways that cause physical reactions (moving their arm, moving their leg) they will respond with something like "Hey, I'm not doing that"
If there is nothing other than physical universe, the stimulation in their brain shouldn't cause that reaction.

ok, so I might have had a few shots but I'll still venture to say the following:
Wait, what?

and

Link?


Now correct me if I'm even in the slightest wrong here:

A human brain is directly manipulated to cause an arm or leg to move.
The human in questions reacts reacts by claiming that he's not the one doing the moving.
This means that there is more than just physical matter in the universe.


You know, unless I've completely misunderstood you I've experienced something very similar during a surgery on my neck (local anaesthesia) when the surgeon had to get past a major nerve, whenever he touched it my arm twisted without me wanting it to. How does that mean there's something that's not physical in the universe? Even if you go a step further and influence the brain?

[PLAYER57832]

Science has always been the same from the start. Instead of being close minded to evolution, it is evolution.

Not quite ... the religious argument was only one group disputing Darwin initially. The only way your statement can be even close to true is if you arbitrarily claim that science only began in the 1800's. Most people take it back a great deal further and include in its birth alchemy, early medicine, etc.

While religion, it changes its philosophy every day. Ever since before christ or buddha or moses or mohammad appeared, there were many old religions that people followed. New ones are still created as of this day, jsut to keep up with its time. All its been is a structure or backbone for a society at a certain point to behave. If you change religion, then its lost all its meaning.

There are possibly as many religions as there are people ... your point? Science is also diverse, conflicted and even, sometimes, arbitrary. None of this precludes the possibility that God might exist.

You see just about year ago the catholics had stopped believing in purgatory. What is up with that? You cant do that and say everything else is still sacred.

I'm not Caltholic. But churches are human institutions, not God himself. Humans are fallible. ... so is science. Admitting that makes each stronger, not weaker.

Then you got the holy wars. The bible and koran, pretty much violent on their own, caused that holy war

Oh and some trade routes, a few folks who lusted after power, some excess population needing to burn energy .... People have absolutely used religion to justify all kinds of evils.... and religion has spurred others on to do great good. This is a failing of humanity, not religion.

More recently, Hitler was an atheist.

. Guess what? Some people got smart enough to go "wait a second, killing is wrong." Unfortunately for the people that weren't smart, we still got that stupid mess over at the middle east.

People are stupid, people are greedy. And some people are actually pretty decent. Unfortunately, the greedy ones sometimes are in control.

So instead of admitting there is a fault with their religious texts, or a contradiction, they either try to play it off as some fundamentalisms and continue to kill for their faiths, or some just try to deny the violent passages. You might as well call them "sacreligious heathens."

We didn't get into this war for religion. Some extremists are now fighting us using claims of religion (and fighting each other, I will add)... and here, some Christians still burn crosses on black folk's lawns, think lynching should be legal. Just because a few idiots want to use religion as their excuse, doesn't mean the religion actually is justification for their actions. Other than that, I won't talk about an on-going war except to say thank you to the soldiers who are fighting and I wish you all home safely.

So good luck believing you omnipotent god, who's also pretty much a contradiction on its own.

The bottom line is none of this in any way disproves the existance of God. They show why you might dislike religion. They show that you blame religion for a lot of bad things. You seen enough to convince yourself God doesn't exist, (which is fine), but you have not proven this in a scientific and empirical way. It is a matter of belief, just like our belief in God is a matter of belief.

MeDeFe: As a pure naturalist, you would argue that everything should have a natural, physical explanation. In neuroscience it is a pretty well documented phenomena that if a conscious person has their physical brain stimulated in ways that cause physical reactions (moving their arm, moving their leg) they will respond with something like "Hey, I'm not doing that"
If there is nothing other than physical universe, the stimulation in their brain shouldn't cause that reaction.

Mr Nate, I will answer you as a Christian and a scientist. I am sorry, but this is not really proof of anything. I, of course, do believe there are mysteries out there, but ironically, the way an arm or leg moves is pretty well known.

[CrazyAnglican]

Hey guys how's it going?

Hey MeDeFe,

This is curiosity more than anything else, most cultures see a three part division of themselves (which makes sense people are basically or fundamentally the same everywhere at this level). They see themselves as body, mind, and spirit. The spirit being the emotional part of the being and the mind being the logical. So people describe breathing as a function of the body; love as spiritual; and Algebra as mental. I'm sure that spirit and mind could both be seen as functions of the brain but they are nonetheless separate and at times at odds with each other.
Now if you've gotten through my preamble without nodding off here we go. As a martial artist I've seen spirit used over and over in ways that boggle the mind. It flows through different areas of the body and can be measured as changes in temperature in the areas that it flows through. It doesn't stop there, however, I routinely respond to the flow of spirit though others (as do most others by, even blindfolded, turning to face at someone who is looking at me with 95% or greater percent accurracy). Certainly this could be set up with me spinning in a circle and someone outside giving me some signal, but it isn't. I turn to the person just as if they had called my name, and the self-defense application is that when I have been accosted I was moving out of the way before the attack began.
Now, there are three possible conclusions we can jump to that I see. I'm lying (you've spoken with me many times; you have to be the judge there). I am honestly deluded (somehow what I'm experiencing is perfectly material and not "spiritual" at all), or I am right (there is something spiritual as part of our being).
One thing that I will add to this is the importance of belief. At first people have trouble with this type of exercise because we are taught not to believe it will work. The first obstacle to overcome is just to believe it will work for you just like it does for everyone else in the class. At the very least it does seem to back up the supposition that belief and the spiritual aspect of our being are related and necessary for one another.

[SupremeAdmiral]

You stupid STUPID people you! How can you believe only in science? Science doesn't know anything and in fact if you look at the big picture science really doesn't know any thing compared to GOD!! And JESUS CHRIST! I feel sorry for you people who are going to go to hell for what you believe in or don't believe in and then maybe you will come to see how you should have believed in God and Jesus!

[jonesthecurl]

OR, to quote Einstein, when you remove the impossible, all that remains .. no matter how improbable, is the truth.

I've just read through the posts from this point on, and I find it hard to believe, but nobody seems to have picked you up on this one.

NOT Einstein, effwits, Sherlock Holmes.(Incidentally, a fictional character, like God.)

[greenoaks]

OR, to quote Einstein, when you remove the impossible, all that remains .. no matter how improbable, is the truth.

I've just read through the posts from this point on, and I find it hard to believe, but nobody seems to have picked you up on this one.

NOT Einstein, effwits, Sherlock Holmes.(Incidentally, a fictional character, like God.)

we didn't pick up on it because we don't read her posts, they are just too long.

[spurgistan]

Player, I do think you're making a bit much out of the fact that it is technically impossible to disprove God as proof that He (or She, or Them) can exist. While it's technically true, it's not a very convincing argument as per Russell's teapot, never mind giving as much credence to FSM as it is to conventional Western monotheism.

However, in response to the original question, I find religion "good" because it lays out basic social ethical guidelines, and punishment for those who break them. While you can make a lot of arguments for how the presence of the state as a guarantor of basic rights, or how religion has been co-opted (or, for the cynics, even created by) those in power in order to keep it, I find that religion counters our basic animal instincts, as fun as they may be. I find myself a pragmatist in the William James mold (although I did fail the class based around his teachings, something I don't really need to go into here) I would suppose I explain my belief in God as based on the fact that you really can't prove one way or the other, and believing in a higher power makes you live in a manner that will get you in the hypothetical Pearly Gates, or past Cerberus the three-headed dog, or the whatnot, which I (and James) find good. Preachy over-religious folk aside , faith can be a very beautiful thing, as well as simply make life seem worth living.

Sorry, got a bit Hallmark-y at the end.

[Neoteny]

Player, I do think you're making a bit much out of the fact that it is technically impossible to disprove God as proof that He (or She, or Them) can exist. While it's technically true, it's not a very convincing argument as per Russell's teapot, never mind giving as much credence to FSM as it is to conventional Western monotheism.

However, in response to the original question, I find religion "good" because it lays out basic social ethical guidelines, and punishment for those who break them. While you can make a lot of arguments for how the presence of the state as a guarantor of basic rights, or how religion has been co-opted (or, for the cynics, even created by) those in power in order to keep it, I find that religion counters our basic animal instincts, as fun as they may be. I find myself a pragmatist in the William James mold (although I did fail the class based around his teachings, something I don't really need to go into here) I would suppose I explain my belief in God as based on the fact that you really can't prove one way or the other, and believing in a higher power makes you live in a manner that will get you in the hypothetical Pearly Gates, or past Cerberus the three-headed dog, or the whatnot, which I (and James) find good. Preachy over-religious folk aside , faith can be a very beautiful thing, as well as simply make life seem worth living.

Sorry, got a bit Hallmark-y at the end.

So, belief for the sake of belief? Is that not self-defeating?

[spurgistan]

Player, I do think you're making a bit much out of the fact that it is technically impossible to disprove God as proof that He (or She, or Them) can exist. While it's technically true, it's not a very convincing argument as per Russell's teapot, never mind giving as much credence to FSM as it is to conventional Western monotheism.

However, in response to the original question, I find religion "good" because it lays out basic social ethical guidelines, and punishment for those who break them. While you can make a lot of arguments for how the presence of the state as a guarantor of basic rights, or how religion has been co-opted (or, for the cynics, even created by) those in power in order to keep it, I find that religion counters our basic animal instincts, as fun as they may be. I find myself a pragmatist in the William James mold (although I did fail the class based around his teachings, something I don't really need to go into here) I would suppose I explain my belief in God as based on the fact that you really can't prove one way or the other, and believing in a higher power makes you live in a manner that will get you in the hypothetical Pearly Gates, or past Cerberus the three-headed dog, or the whatnot, which I (and James) find good. Preachy over-religious folk aside , faith can be a very beautiful thing, as well as simply make life seem worth living.

Sorry, got a bit Hallmark-y at the end.

So, belief for the sake of belief? Is that not self-defeating?

Not especially. To paraphrase James (and admittedly this loses something, as paraphrasing smarter people will do) it is impossible to prove any metaphysical question true or false. Atheism, logically, is as valid as theism is as logical as Invisible Pink Elephants. However, (generalization) religious people find more to live for than atheists, pre-occupied as they are with the whole no-afterlife thing. You can call this a (generalized) benefit of belief.

Screw it, trying to explain this using religion is something like Russian Roulette. Say I was unsure I was going to be a starter on my Ultimate Frisbee team next year. I may know that the seniors are going to be taking most of the plays, as well as my skill set being somewhat redundant (we have a lot of 6 foot fast guys). But if I believe that I'm not going to rot on the bench, that I can really contribute, I am more likely to work hard over the summer and be nice to the captains and such. The fact that I effectively delude myself into thinking I'm going to be getting a lot of PT inspires me to do better, and may in fact either make the entire team more competitive or even succeed in the self-fulfilling prophecy. Awful analogy, but I think that's basically Pragmatism.

[Iliad]

You stupid STUPID people you! How can you believe only in science? Science doesn't know anything and in fact if you look at the big picture science really doesn't know any thing compared to GOD!! And JESUS CHRIST! I feel sorry for you people who are going to go to hell for what you believe in or don't believe in and then maybe you will come to see how you should have believed in God and Jesus!

I just hope this is a troll

[MeDeFe]

Hey guys how's it going?

Hey MeDeFe,

This is curiosity more than anything else, most cultures see a three part division of themselves (which makes sense people are basically or fundamentally the same everywhere at this level). They see themselves as body, mind, and spirit. The spirit being the emotional part of the being and the mind being the logical. So people describe breathing as a function of the body; love as spiritual; and Algebra as mental. I'm sure that spirit and mind could both be seen as functions of the brain but they are nonetheless separate and at times at odds with each other.

Yes, that's how I see them, as functions of the brain. Comparable to a quite powerful computer with a highly sophisticated software that can rewrite itself and learn things.

Now if you've gotten through my preamble without nodding off here we go. As a martial artist I've seen spirit used over and over in ways that boggle the mind. It flows through different areas of the body and can be measured as changes in temperature in the areas that it flows through. It doesn't stop there, however, I routinely respond to the flow of spirit though others (as do most others by, even blindfolded, turning to face at someone who is looking at me with 95% or greater percent accurracy). Certainly this could be set up with me spinning in a circle and someone outside giving me some signal, but it isn't. I turn to the person just as if they had called my name, and the self-defense application is that when I have been accosted I was moving out of the way before the attack began.

For your first point, I would counter that changes in temperature are a perfectly physical phenomenon, your body (which is you) causes those reactions in itself.
For the second, turning towards someone who's watching you, a few more details would be good, exactly what are the circumstances? You and one other person in the room? Or other persons as well? How far away are they? What are they doing at the time? If it's just you and one other and everyone else sitting quietly by the wall or doing the same practice I can easily imagine that you're going by sound and smell.
Similar for the third if you've already located the approximate position of the person and notice an involuntary change in their breathing before they try to push you or whatever you can start moving away before the push comes.

Of course, if this is taking place while everyone else is going "HAI!" and splitting wood for a campfire without using an axe I'll have a harder time offering an alternative explanation. An explanation that in all its' physicalism is no less amazing than the concept of controlling spiritual flows, but a lot easier.

Now, there are three possible conclusions we can jump to that I see. I'm lying (you've spoken with me many times; you have to be the judge there). I am honestly deluded (somehow what I'm experiencing is perfectly material and not "spiritual" at all), or I am right (there is something spiritual as part of our being).

Not delusion, maybe a misinterpretation, but as I said, some more details would be nice.

One thing that I will add to this is the importance of belief. At first people have trouble with this type of exercise because we are taught not to believe it will work. The first obstacle to overcome is just to believe it will work for you just like it does for everyone else in the class. At the very least it does seem to back up the supposition that belief and the spiritual aspect of our being are related and necessary for one another.

I certainly agree with your main gist here, we're a lot likelier to succeed at something if we think we can actually do it than if we're convinced we can't.

[suggs]

Yes, thats true. If you want to be brain washed, brain washing is more likely to succeed, good point Maccy D.

[Napoleon Ier]

Well, in answer to your question snakey, I myself am rather partial to a bit of the old vinum sacramentalis every so often.

[InkL0sed]

Now if you've gotten through my preamble without nodding off here we go. As a martial artist I've seen spirit used over and over in ways that boggle the mind. It flows through different areas of the body and can be measured as changes in temperature in the areas that it flows through. It doesn't stop there, however, I routinely respond to the flow of spirit though others (as do most others by, even blindfolded, turning to face at someone who is looking at me with 95% or greater percent accurracy). Certainly this could be set up with me spinning in a circle and someone outside giving me some signal, but it isn't. I turn to the person just as if they had called my name, and the self-defense application is that when I have been accosted I was moving out of the way before the attack began.

I remember hearing something on NPR about this -- it was about reacting to something before you see it. Apparently, there's some kind of shortcut your nerves can take that go faster than it takes for your brain to process an image, so sometimes it seems like people react to things before they happen. It was a long time ago, and I don't remember the details, but that was the main point of it.

[MeDeFe]

Now if you've gotten through my preamble without nodding off here we go. As a martial artist I've seen spirit used over and over in ways that boggle the mind. It flows through different areas of the body and can be measured as changes in temperature in the areas that it flows through. It doesn't stop there, however, I routinely respond to the flow of spirit though others (as do most others by, even blindfolded, turning to face at someone who is looking at me with 95% or greater percent accurracy). Certainly this could be set up with me spinning in a circle and someone outside giving me some signal, but it isn't. I turn to the person just as if they had called my name, and the self-defense application is that when I have been accosted I was moving out of the way before the attack began.

I remember hearing something on NPR about this -- it was about reacting to something before you see it. Apparently, there's some kind of shortcut your nerves can take that go faster than it takes for your brain to process an image, so sometimes it seems like people react to things before they happen. It was a long time ago, and I don't remember the details, but that was the main point of it.

I was assuming they were blindfolded, what would otherwise be so amazing about it?