|
The problem of many religions. (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Project-K |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
I'm not so sure that using morality tales, fables, or religion necessarily has to develop this way. |
Not necessarily, but sometimes it does.
| quote: |
I was raised in a Catholic family, but was never raised to take anything in the bible literally - they were stories meant to illustrate an ethical code people should live by, nothing more. |
What I'm saying is that you really didn't need any of that bible stuff because, being the smart guy I know you are, you would have processed that information on your own, and thus derived your own moral code from it. |
|
|
| XaNaX |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
I think it arises out of a natural need that human beings have for something to hope for. This of course does not justify all of the terrible things that have happened in the name of religion, nor does it really make sense of exactly why people project this need into "a God up in the sky", but it does, however, seem like a pretty reasonable explanation. |
My biggest problem with religion is when you look at it in a historical context. Most religions were created a long time ago and their teachings were used to do one of the following:
1. Explain something that science at the time was not advanced enough to explain
2. Control people for the benefit of a secular leader
There are of course exceptions but if you look at the major organized religions this holds true. When you start thinking about their teachings in this context you start to wonder if any of it is really true. |
|
|
| d-miurge |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
I'm not quite sure that I said that, and in fact when I quote Clovis and said:
I thought my sympathies for the religious (and specifically, religious educational traditions like the Jesuits) was clear. My apologies if it wasn't. |
No need of apologies I get your point and agree with you on that, I just tried to bring a nuance.
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Absolutely agree with all of this as well, but you have to remember that part of all of this nonsense is that the first "Americans" came here to escape religious persecution and seek their own faith systems. We've had a much, much shorter life span than the bulk of Western Europe, which (like it or not) means that you've all had much more time to become fed up with the institution of religion, whereas our country was founded on the notion of preserving religious institutions without their influence on government.
|
It's not really nonsensical, sorry to bore you with etymology but religere in Latin means 'to link people'. Religion helps to build the cohesion of the American society. In a context of a newly-born America, religion was one of the things that allow to unite people. For instance in France we had and still have human rights and the Revolution (Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité). We have a religion of secularism.
In America it has little to nothing to do with your government because it's more a symbol than an active regulator of public life, as it was in these times in Europe (although it was already very blamed).
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
I'm not so sure that using morality tales, fables, or religion necessarily has to develop this way. I was raised in a Catholic family, but was never raised to take anything in the bible literally - they were stories meant to illustrate an ethical code people should live by, nothing more.
I think contextualizing through role models isn't really any different than contextualizing a story using Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd - so long as you're not telling kids that Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd actually exist, and this is something that they did in the past so that we can learn how to live now.
No good can come of bull like that. |
Don't forget that God hates America (and fags).
edit:
| quote: | Originally posted by Meat187
I totally agree.
The more interesting question is, why did (and maybe does) religion pop up almost everywhere like an itchy rash. Why did so many cultures develop some sort of religion? What does your anthropology class about that? |
The 2 major fears of human beings are Time and the Other. (it's the title of a track of mine coming on GU in September /autopromotion).
When you know there is something after your death (heaven, metempsychosis, döner kebab), you don't have the anguish of time anymore (or less). And when you have something above you that links you to your neighbor, where you have to love him as yourself, others become more friendly. |
|
|
| thesauce23 |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
So I put it to you - what do you all think of the problem of many religions? |
the separation they create.. in essence they all say ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL, but realistically are divided and labeled because of religions.
pain, joy, despair, peace- are all the same in all humans.. feelings speak louder than theory |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Meat187
The more interesting question is, why did (and maybe does) religion pop up almost everywhere like an itchy rash. Why did so many cultures develop some sort of religion? What does your anthropology class about that? |
I tend to agree that this is the more interesting question here. I find explanations of religion grounded in evolutionary psychology to be the most persuasive at this time, but it remains unclear whether religion itself offers (or offered) an evolutionary advantage or whether it was only a spandrel. Though, in truth, religion as we know it is probably the result of a number of characteristics, some of which are likely spandrels and some of which were likely selected for directly.
The anthropologist Pascal Boyer has an excellent book on the topic.
The text of a lecture by Boyer on why certain types of concepts appear repeatedly in diverse religions, including those which were completely isolated from major world religions, is available free online here (credit goes to Renegade for the link):
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/anthro/b...us_concepts.htm
The work of Deborah Kelemen is also pretty interesting as it suggests that young children[1] and Alzheimer's patients[2] share a particular tendency to view particular objects of phenomena as the result of the actions of an agent, even in the (apparent) absence of any evidence to support that view. Kelemen calls this "promiscuous teleology," and I think that it can also be explained in evolutionary terms. Justin L. Barrett proposes the idea of a hyperactive agency detection device in this book, suggesting that there may be an evolutionary advantage in erring to the side of attributing an unexplained phenomenon to an agent (e.g. a predator) even if there is no direct evidence to suggest as much. This strikes me as a pretty good explanation of Kelemen's results from an evolutionary standpoint. It also supports the view of religious tendencies as largely a spandrel.
I'm pleased to be able to say that it's quite an active area of research, so we can expect more insights to be forthcoming in the near future. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by d-miurge
(it's the title of a track of mine coming on GU in September /autopromotion).
|
:stongue: :stongue: Bien joue |
|
|
| d-miurge |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
:stongue: :stongue: Bien joue |
C'est annoncé un peu moins lourdement que blaïque jarèle non? :p |
|
|
| Ek0nomik |
Off Topic:
What Uni are you at RJT?
On Topic:
I've debated this issue far too much, but I'll disclose that I'm an Atheist who has a problem with Agnosticism. |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ek0nomik
Off Topic:
What Uni are you at RJT?
|
Did an environmental ethics degree at UWSP, finishing a semester of research and a comparative religions degree at UWM this semester.
Applying to Marquette, UWM, and Depaul for graduate work. |
|
|
| Ek0nomik |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Did an environmental ethics degree at UWSP, finishing a semester of research and a comparative religions degree at UWM this semester.
Applying to Marquette, UWM, and Depaul for graduate work. |
Awesome. :D Good luck with getting into the school of your choice. What type of work are you getting yourself into?
Yeh, I'm taking this off topic. |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ek0nomik
Yeh, I'm taking this off topic. |
I'm not a stickler about staying on topic. ;)
| quote: | Originally posted by Ek0nomik
Awesome. :D Good luck with getting into the school of your choice. What type of work are you getting yourself into?
|
Initially I just wanted to teach religious history in the Catholic high school system (I know - it doesn't make sense, but my justification for it is another story entirely), but recently on the advice of a few professors encouraging me to pursue grad school, I began entertaining the notion of just taking philosophy all the way to a doctorate and writing/teaching at the university level.
I'm probably most interested in theories of identity and their metaphysical implications (it's actually what my capstone research is on this semester - brain states and self). |
|
|
| d-miurge |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
I'm not a stickler about staying on topic. ;)
Initially I just wanted to teach religious history in the Catholic high school system (I know - it doesn't make sense, but my justification for it is another story entirely), but recently on the advice of a few professors encouraging me to pursue grad school, I began entertaining the notion of just taking philosophy all the way to a doctorate and writing/teaching at the university level.
I'm probably most interested in theories of identity and their metaphysical implications (it's actually what my capstone research is on this semester - brain states and self). |
Huhu Dr Turner. |
|
|
|
|
