|
A world without religion. (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Omega_M |
The question is as meaningless as asking, what would we be doing without science ?
Religion is a natural evolution of thought and you are capable of asking such question precisely because of the thousands of years of intellectual growth we've had behind us.
It's just a matter of time. Evolution of religious/scientific though is as natural as evolution of human being.
Needless to say, we would not have survived for so long, had we not developed a process of defining "good" and "evil" based on moral/ethical rules laid down by religion. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by AndreaCKY772
i always like reading your opinios. you should write a novel. |
Whoa, thanks :)
I do think of writing a novel, but so far I'm so disorganised I can barely mantain my blog :p
Once I finish some of the things I promised myself of achieving this year, I might do that :) |
|
|
| dallastar |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
The question is as meaningless as asking, what would we be doing without science ?
. |
so true! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! |
|
|
| Temperate |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
The question is as meaningless as asking, what would we be doing without science ? |
I disagree. We can ask similar questions, "What would the world be like without the wheel" or your question, "What would we be doing without science?". We can look to other societies to get an idea. The western hemisphere was without the convenience of the wheel until the europeans came. They were also without a sophisticated science. Though we don't have other societies to refer to, when talking about having no religion, I think your imagination can conjure up some fairly good ideas. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
The question is as meaningless as asking, what would we be doing without science ? |
Not to disprove your point, as I think you hit the nail on the head, but hardly a question like this is "meaningless".
We should debate about the things around us, in order to understand them and, only then, decide what our stance about that certain issue is. Unless, of course, you really don't care about it, and you want to remain neutral. |
|
|
| Xenocreator_PG_ |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Therefore, even if people didn't worship a God, they'd find some other religion-like ideology to attach themselves to. Like nationalism, or communism, capitalism...
|
I don’t worship a god!! I don't believe in god or Santa either and I haven't attached myself to some other religion-like ideology!
So I guess this makes me a special individual with super powers. People should look up to me & learn from me, so I propose that you all join my 'club'. It’s called the Gathering of Anti-religious Disciples (or just GAD for short). If you become of member and work for gad then you'll achieve true enlightenment, self importance, self worth and most importantly self digestive implosion reactor filters that make stomach rumbles more energy efficient!! Gad will always be for you. You'll always have a friend in gad because gad is real & exists in every one of us. Sign up now!! Gad accepts everyone! Link to gad: -Believe in gad- |
|
|
| Omega_M |
Lira, are you studying science, or are your thoughts influenced by science ? I'd say, the best philosophers are those who have a physicist's background. They ask the same questions as philosophers do, and make an attempt to find systematic answers. THey have a better grip on reality mainly because they discover/study the laws that are making this system run.
I'm not talking about all philosophers in general, like those dealing with social/economical problems. But philosophers who question the nature of existance, universe, creation etc should have a scientific background to actually know the fasciating universe which is being unraveled through complex mathematical philosophies such as relativity and quantum mechanics.
All great scientists were philosophers first, and science is all about finding answers to these philosophical questions. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Xenocreator_PG_
I don’t worship a god!! I don't believe in god or Santa either and I haven't attached myself to some other religion-like ideology! |
Do you consider yourself Australian? Do you believe in science? Do you believe in (academic) philosophy? Do you share moral norms with those around you?
Anyway, the problem here is that you're an individual. Even though societies are a group of individuals, I do wonder whether we can really apply these individual rules to society as a whole.
Let's suppose you don't care about your nationality (I know I couldn't care less about mine), you don't care about either science or philosophy, and you don't share moral norms with those around you. And, let's suppose the whole society you live in behaves like this.
What would the reaction of this society be to someone who believed in science, philosophy, religion or that had a specific set of morals? Would you consider this person as a "deviant"?
I tend to avoid this myself, but, as I said, I wonder whether a whole society could manage to do that without clinging to this nihilism... |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
I agree with Durkheim: without religion, there would be no society.
|
There were societies way before religion....ever heard of the Stoics or the Greeks? And don;t say philosophy is a religion....please dont tant it.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Temperate |
| quote: | Originally posted by tiesto14
There were societies way before religion.
:rolleyes: |
Yes, there were!
 |
|
|
| Omega_M |
| quote: | Originally posted by Temperate
I disagree. We can ask similar questions, "What would the world be like without the wheel" or your question, "What would we be doing without science?". We can look to other societies to get an idea. The western hemisphere was without the convenience of the wheel until the europeans came. They were also without a sophisticated science. Though we don't have other societies to refer to, when talking about having no religion, I think your imagination can conjure up some fairly good ideas. |
Ofcourse we can ask these questions. But what I'm saying is, that they are hypothetical in nature.
Western world was without a wheel until Europeans came :conf:
The Europeans were probably without wheel until someone went to Egypt
You see, it's all a question of time. The red indians were not living in caves until the Europeans came. They had evolved their own systems which worked for them. Given sufficient time and a need, they would have invented the wheel.
Human mind evolves universally. Its just a matter of time and circumstances which leads to one section developing something superior to another.
| quote: |
Though we don't have other societies to refer to, when talking about having no religion,I think your imagination can conjure up some fairly good ideas. |
You define science as something which the europeans developed. I define it more generally as the system which people evolved by exploiting the nature around them. The red indians did it, the Egyptians did it, the Greeks did it, the Indians did it, the Chinese did it, tribals living in Amazon forests are doing it, all in their own ways and according to their own needs.
Similarly with religion. It's impossible for any society to evolve without religion. Hence, even thought you are free to ask these questions, they are all hypothetical. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
Lira, are you studying science, or are your thoughts influenced by science ? I'd say, the best philosophers are those who have a physicist's background. They ask the same questions as philosophers do, and make an attempt to find systematic answers. THey have a better grip on reality mainly because they discover/study the laws that are making this system run.
I'm not talking about all philosophers in general, like those dealing with social/economical problems. But philosophers who question the nature of existance, universe, creation etc should have a scientific background to actually know the fasciating universe which is being unraveled through complex mathematical philosophies such as relativity and quantum mechanics.
All great scientists were philosophers first, and science is all about finding answers to these philosophical questions. |
Well, I do study linguistics in university, and I study humanities partially on my own (e.g. sociology, psychology, etc... reason why I mentioned Durkheim) as, unfortunately, I can't attend all these classes at uni because of our educational system here (we don't have concepts such as "minor" and "major").
Anyway, as for physics, maths and biology, I've felt the need of knowing more about these fields lately, but since my main focus is on "language", I'm sadly have to leave them in the "background" for a while (even though I admit they're necessary).
By the way, do you study physics or maths or...? |
|
|
|
|
