quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN whilst i hesitate to take on both arbiter AND renegade, here goes! excellent article, cheers. so what its basically saying is that americans are children? yes, which is why i still maintain that nurture is the deciding factor; we're not children forever so for adults to maintain this "childlike" understanding of the world there must be something else. i dont think we can extrapolate child psychology that far: because superstition has been a staple to fill in the void of actual knowledge for as long as man has walked around? wouldnt the belief in something "unseen" be kind of moot, considering that obviously god's havent been roaming the earth? what about cultures that names god's for the things actually seen, such as the sun, moon or the weather? i think superstitious belief was more an early quasi-science than some kind of inherent tool, building upon as it was, the fear of that's making those leaves rustle. Wouldn't a sense of the "sacred" relate more to early notions of morality? If we are to accept that peoples all over the world were more or less the same, similar evolutions in ethical morality should be expected? Such beliefs being made religious in nature lends itself more to that "childlike" understanding of the world, but I don’t understand why it should persist into adulthood asides from ignorance and cultural norms. but what IS "spirituality"? a tendency to believe in the intangible? It might be fine to have an unnatural fear of what's making those leaves rustle, but it is an altogether different mental process to go from that to inventing spirits. I think that's far more likely to be related to early (and subsequent inheritance) of ignorance and myth than it is some kind of gene, unless like i said, its building upon that irrational "fear". but how has something SO external (ie magical or unbelievable) managed to worm its way into our genetic makeup in such a (relatively) short time? why then is the nature of religious belief/adherence SO very cultural in nature? could this gene, if it is is even responsible, just make one susceptible to the intangible (not dissimilar from arbiter's article of children's early false assumptions)? wouldn't spirituality be entirely external and far too specific to be natural? firstly, fucken hahahahahahaha! How does that relate to the intangible though? "ooh I must'nt be naughty or I will punished after im dead?" there's no real, actual stimuli to promote such a response. I agree that a gene might give a predisposition to intangible belief, but I still think there's a pretty gap between that and spirituality, without including the (very particular and specific) influence of social norms. And these social norms are merely inherited ideology from a time where superstition made up for scientific enquiry (imo), so I still don’t see a gene (if it exists) as impetus enough for religious belief. yes, see this i could accept. btw, is that book you linked easy reading? looks interesting

Yeah, I mean, you're right. You need look no farther than modern "science" in order to see exactly where and why religion exists.

People believe in the things science procures today without a second though, and it was the same exact thing in every stage of human existence and perhaps beyond, for whatever their "science" may have been.

I guarantee in 100 years everything we believe will have relegated to the backburner of foolishness and mythology. It's always happened, and always will.

This is why I can't help but think that the universe itself is a maleable organism, patrolling the energies we release as much as we patrol it.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN so, all we need is to get the world to abuse ecstasy and the belief in god will disappear?

I think I'm pretty good evidence that this would not work.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by RickyM you're just a shit version of Moral Hazard. At least he knows what he's talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lol, i love it when moral feels the need to lay the smack down

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN because superstition has been a staple to fill in the void of actual knowledge for as long as man has walked around? wouldnt the belief in something "unseen" be kind of moot, considering that obviously god's havent been roaming the earth?

Yeah, but you're still left with the problem of why these "superstitions" have such universal and predictable properties. You can go to any culture in the world and find that the people there believe in invisible, conscious agents that respond to things like prayer, ritual and sacrifice. It is difficult to explain this ubiquity without presuming that there is either good evidence for the existence of such agents that cultures around the world have all been able to stumble upon, or that the belief in such agents is merely an artifact of the way our minds work.

quote:

what about cultures that names god's for the things actually seen, such as the sun, moon or the weather?

These are still "invisible, conscious agents that respond to things like prayer, ritual and sacrifice", they just happen to exist inside celestial bodies. The sun for ancient pagans wasn't just an inert object that travelled across the sky, it was an object with an unseen agency that could be entreated for favours and blessings (good weather for crops etc.).

quote:

Wouldn't a sense of the "sacred" relate more to early notions of morality?

When I mentioned sacredness I was referring more to the idea that an object (a piece of land, a geological feature, or some manmade object, say) can be held in an esteem that completely transcends the value of its immediate utility. As an example, look at the sort of esteem that the black rock at Mecca is held in by Muslims. Any way you look at it, it's just a rock in a wall that doesn't actually do anything, but the value of that rock to Muslims everywhere is almost unquantifiable: millions around the world would lay down their lives just to prevent that rock from being chipped. Looked at objectively, it really doesn't make any sense.

Like all other aspects of religion, the notion of the "sacred" is completely counter-intuitive, completely counter-adaptive and completely peculiar to humans. Given its ubiquity in all human cultures, it is again a phenomenon that would is difficult to explain without some recourse to neurology.

quote:

If we are to accept that peoples all over the world were more or less the same, similar evolutions in ethical morality should be expected?

Well we all have a sense of morality and justice, though the content of our morals may differ. I'm fairly sure that foundational aspects of morality - a sense of fairness, a sense of empathy, intuitive understanding of "Tit for Tat" reciprocity etc. - will be present in any culture you care to name.

quote:

Such beliefs being made religious in nature lends itself more to that "childlike" understanding of the world, but I don’t understand why it should persist into adulthood asides from ignorance and cultural norms.

I agree, but unfortunately beliefs that are integral to one's view of the world usually die hard, regardless of how in conflict with reality they may be. There's a good article explaining this phenomenon here:

http://csicop.org/si/2000-11/beliefs.html

Okay, I'll finish this tomorrow. I think I'm slowly losing the ability to make marathon posts after midnight...

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Okay, I'll finish this tomorrow. I think I'm slowly losing the ability to make marathon posts after midnight...

Quit being such a slacker and dispell the suspense man .

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

Basically, humans have a (natural) fear of death, like all living creatures on the planet.

We've chosen a way that deals with that fear by believing that somehow, despite common sense and all of the evidence available, we're going to live on after our time here on earth expires.

To that end, we've created "god" and "heaven". It makes it easier for most people to cope with their mortality.

It's childish and irresponsible to believe in magical powers to "resurrect", etc...but that's the power of a natural instinct for you (fear of death).

If we could get past it and start dealing with each other on the planet here and now, where it counts, as opposed to selfishly living primarily for some imagined "after-life", the world might be a LOT better place.

___________________
The thing about money? It makes you do things that you don't want to do