Religie

Relix

Slimste Forummer 2020
Care to detail where the lies are?
In relation to religions? Or to christianity in particular? Or to how compagnies, countries and institutions (including the big faiths) try to propagate idea's in order to benefit themselves as their prime motivation (which is not much different now than it was during the colonial times in my opinion)?
 

ParDeTetasSLB

Terreinknecht
In relation to religions? Or to christianity in particular? Or to how compagnies, countries and institutions (including the big faiths) try to propagate idea's in order to benefit themselves as their prime motivation (which is not much different now than it was during the colonial times in my opinion)?

That is true. But we shouldn't reduce the colonial times motivations to only a self-benefit perspective.
 

De Bouterbaas

Grappigste forummer 2020
Quite an exaggeration and unsustained claim isn't it. For all extents, the moral foundations of religion are the moral foundations of a civilization. In our case, the Western Civilization, Europe.

If religion has accomplished one thing it is oppression of weak. Morals did exist long before Christian religions. It does not take (and never took) religion to have high moral standards.
 

ParDeTetasSLB

Terreinknecht
If religion has accomplished one thing it is oppression of weak. Morals did exist long before Christian religions. It does not take (and never took) religion to have high moral standards.

That's an ongoing debate. But I am not debating that tbh: I know that we can individually be good without religion, or very bad and religious. I have the most kind and lovable friends that happen to be atheist. What I was saying is that most societies derive their sets of costumes and values from religions, and our Western civilization - originally - is culturally and morally based on Christian values and for all extents, even with our faults, looking back 100 years till now we're still the leaders for free and advanced societies, the pinnacle of knowledge and technology.
 

-040-

Assistent Bondscoach
That's an ongoing debate. But I am not debating that tbh: I know that we can individually be good without religion, or very bad and religious. I have the most kind and lovable friends that happen to be atheist. What I was saying is that most societies derive their sets of costumes and values from religions, and our Western civilization - originally - is culturally and morally based on Christian values and for all extents, even with our faults, looking back 100 years till now we're still the leaders for free and advanced societies, the pinnacle of knowledge and technology.
Did you realise this, looking at your Sony, Samsung or Huawei? Or do you have a Portugese brand? ;)
 

Relix

Slimste Forummer 2020
Before the dark ages (and since, outside our bubble) there have been many cultures that did quite well in terms of organisation, societal structures, water management, (sustainable) aggriculture and cultivation, exploration, mathmatics, architecture, economics and what not without adhering to any of the monotheisms. I wouldn't put "spreading the/a faith" as a beneficial accomplishment in itself. Rather the opposite, I view strong religious convictions as a very worrying frame of mind in relation to scientific progress and even a nuisance in philosophical and ethical debate. I find it hard to descibe, but I find the reason you help others because you care for them, see them as your equals, and have the emphathy to understand it could have been you who needed help or support as morally superior to one that helps because he is thought this would please their god, out of fear, or out of bribe for an better afterlife. That said, its the action of helping and careing that is the most important. At least in theisms there is some training/time to contemplate on things outside ones personal gain, that lacks (imo) a bit in schools and other parts of society (in which you want/need to prove yourself better than others). I just completely disagree you need to convince yourself or others that this fictional God is the source of Good, and that this book which your church/mosk/temple acknowledges describes all the things he/it likes and dislikes, providing a route for a happy afterlife and his bliss over the time you have on earth.
 
Laatst bewerkt:

Relix

Slimste Forummer 2020
That's an ongoing debate. But I am not debating that tbh: I know that we can individually be good without religion, or very bad and religious. I have the most kind and lovable friends that happen to be atheist. What I was saying is that most societies derive their sets of costumes and values from religions, and our Western civilization - originally - is culturally and morally based on Christian values and for all extents, even with our faults, looking back 100 years till now we're still the leaders for free and advanced societies, the pinnacle of knowledge and technology.
Derive from? I would state to exact oposite. Societies/cultures insert their morals, predispositions, wishes and cultural values in their religious system? The majority of men find the thought of having sex with another man disgusting, so the God we imagine surely doesn"t like homosexuality and has forbidden it as a capital crime (one more obvious example). We mistrust people that think, behave or look different and have other cultural values to us, so surely the God we image doesn't look kindly uppon non-believers or adherents of a different faith?

And whereas cultures evolve (and with globalisation this happens faster than ever before), the faiths have become more of a brake on progress and openmindedness in many areas. Slowing down the process of learning to get along and respect eachother for who we are and what we do, irrespective of our religious and cultural backgrounds. Don't blindly force judgement on others based on which God-story your ancestors made up during times that probably looked completely different. Judge others openly, looking for the things you can learn from them and things you have in common before starting to list with what you can teach/the other should learn before they receive your respect, help or appreciation. That is progress.
 
Laatst bewerkt:

ParDeTetasSLB

Terreinknecht
By the way, lots of insightful and interesting answers were given, I'll navigate and comment through them once/if I have the time and feel like it.
 
Laatst bewerkt:

ParDeTetasSLB

Terreinknecht
Relix I will do a little bit of cherry picking, in order to condense my answers, feel free to do the same or point out a specific part of your post that I've missed.

Derive from? I would state to exact opposite. Societies/cultures insert their morals, predispositions, wishes and cultural values in their religious system? The majority of men find the thought of having sex with another man disgusting, so the God we imagine surely doesn"t like homosexuality and has forbidden it as a capital crime (one more obvious example). We mistrust people that think, behave or look different and have other cultural values to us, so surely the God we image doesn't look kindly upon non-believers or adherents of a different faith?

If this would be the case, then you're suggesting that some people from some parts of the world are inherently less civilized and more evil, which led to inject them those values in religion, and as a loop effect that same religion controls the society in a negative way.

Like some countries with higher influences from Islam, where gays are stoned, women can't walk on the streets without men, etc.

Then in other places like the West, people are inherently better, and the same process happened in the opposite way and that's why for all extents we're the places in the world where human rights are more advanced?

This makes no sense.

The idea of secularism in Europe is quite recent. Most of our values derive of course from the mother religion of our civilization, regardless of we being able to understand that men can derive a set of values without religion.

And whereas cultures evolve (and with globalisation this happens faster than ever before), the faiths have become more of a brake on progress and openmindedness in many areas. Slowing down the process of learning to get along and respect eachother for who we are and what we do, irrespective of our religious and cultural backgrounds. Don't blindly force judgement on others based on which God-story your ancestors made up during times that probably looked completely different. Judge others openly, looking for the things you can learn from them and things you have in common before starting to list with what you can teach/the other should learn before they receive your respect, help or appreciation. That is progress.

And yet you have very religious countries like Portugal that are worldwidely known for being extremely welcoming, secure and tolerant.

And you have countries that are not that religious like Japan and Korea, which even though yes are very advanced, they are still very racist and unwelcoming of strangers, different skin colors, etc.

So it seems to me that the blockage of your "progress" (I put it on quotes as I don't know exactly what you mean there) are not quite related to the fact of a Nation has its moral values founded in religion or not, and I'd go even that far, that Christian religions are still the world reference of humanity and tolerance today (just look at the place where those in need end in).

Before the dark ages (and since, outside our bubble) there have been many cultures that did quite well in terms of organisation, societal structures, water management, (sustainable) aggriculture and cultivation, exploration, mathmatics, architecture, economics and what not without adhering to any of the monotheisms.

But even so believing in ethereal concepts like karma and divine justice.

I find it hard to descibe, but I find the reason you help others because you care for them, see them as your equals, and have the empathy to understand it could have been you who needed help or support as morally superior to one that helps because he is thought this would please their god, out of fear, or out of bribe for an better afterlife.

Even if religious writings are 100% men invention, one of their motivations would be to control men's natural urges based on purely sensations.

The reason I'm saying this is that yes I agree with you that caring for others gives us a higher purpose in living, but ultimately we're selfish and put our survival and reproduction first.

Even hardcore atheists argue that the origin for men's sense of good and bad comes from a selfish self-surival prespective: helping the fellow men increases the chances of him/her helping you next. A very interesting take on it tbh.
 

Relix

Slimste Forummer 2020
If this would be the case, then you're suggesting that some people from some parts of the world are inherently less civilized and more evil, which led to inject them those values in religion, and as a loop effect that same religion controls the society in a negative way.

Like some countries with higher influences from Islam, where gays are stoned, women can't walk on the streets without men, etc.

Then in other places like the West, people are inherently better, and the same process happened in the opposite way and that's why for all extents we're the places in the world where human rights are more advanced?

This makes no sense.
Cultural morals have been passed down from people with authority to their communities with loads of self interest, wrappend in a relligious sauce to defend thoose choices an silence critisism. Equal rights for men and women weren"t the standart in Christianity when it spread across Europe, still today some faiths consider men as more worthy (priesthood, vow of celebacy, difference in divorce choices, stance on marriage rights etc, or issues like having children).

Also the valuation of life of non-adherrents (infidels, heretics, even protestant - catholic hatred) was (or is) complety biassed imo. Crusades, inquisition, wars and rebellions have all been gladly inserted with the faith to convince people to do bad things for a so called greater good. Let alone the dubious role of religious groups to support or cover atrocious acts done to indigeous people (Canada) or children (abuse schandals). No, it's fine if you state that you want to attribute some of your own decency to your religious upbringing but don't bullshit me about the Christian faith being the pinnacle of tolerance, morals and ethics.

In its base cultural education (in which religions can play a role) can create social bonding and a shared framework of ethics which are hard to describe with reasoning alone, preventing conflict within the group by creating a family like identity. So yes, there is also a strong self-interest, less conflict means more security and resources for growth and a support network during negative events (social care, sharing emotions, grief and comfort etc). But if you are of a different family (faith) or differ from the majority (like homosexuality) faits are often brutal and evil imo. Secularism has made Europe a better place, not Christianity (and i even wouldn't say European ethics are by definition better than for instance those held in Butan, Korea, Arabic countries, indigenous tribes or any other culture).
 
Laatst bewerkt:

ParDeTetasSLB

Terreinknecht
No, it's fine if you state that you want to attribute some of your own decency to your religious upbringing but don't bullshit me about the Christian faith being the pinnacle of tolerance, morals and ethics.

What I actually said is that the civilizations based on Christianity were always the pinnacle of tolerance, morals and ethics. It's a small difference that to be honest I am not sure if it's that relevant to our discussion: my whole point here is that Europe should not lose sight of those references.

Also, I am not bullshitting you. It is what it is. Just see how people move around the world and where they want to go.

It's obvious that bad things happened, namely involving countries with colonial past, our both countries Portugal and Netherlands. But we learned from them mostly, I believe, because we had the moral framework which allowed more and more people to see the right path (all humans equal, etc).

Also it's important to be understood that just because one is an atheist it doesn't mean that it doesn't grow under the historical influence of that moral/religous framework.

(and i even wouldn't say European ethics are by definition better than for instance those held in Butan, Korea, Arabic countries, indigenous tribes or any other culture).

I don't want to sound condescending here at all, but something tells me you haven't lived and worked much abroad, to believe that such a rationalization makes any sense (no culture is better or more advanced than others).

That just doesn't make any sense to me.

Science does not 'believe'.
So, no it is not.

Stop wishing / hoping / praying / pretending it is.

Science can not prove in a lab or empirically where does the moral ground of civilizations come. And even if it did, all I said is that's an ongoing debate. So you're the one pretending that's an undeniable truth. A simple Google search will reveal you that. I'd argue that's one of the most common philosophical debates happening since forever till now.

There was actually a very interesting debate involving Sam Harris and Shapiro on that, recently, where both make excellent points.

Having said so, I do appreciate you debating the topic ParDeTetasSLB . We do not agree, but that's perfectly fine.

Yes, I appreciate these debates as well, they're usually not comfortable and that's a necessary condition for growth.
 
Laatst bewerkt:

Relix

Slimste Forummer 2020
I don't want to sound condescending here at all, but something tells me you haven't lived and worked much abroad, to believe that such a rationalization makes any sense (no culture is better or more advanced than others).
I am working in science (2nd stint abroad), quite an international setting I would think. My colleagues and friends come from many different countries, quite a number without christian history, and i do not agree they are at a disadvantage because of that. Admittedly, not many of them believe in God(s), but i enjoy their opinions on family, society, sustainability, capitalism, tolerance, open mindedness, (world)politics. So I stand by my argument that being raised in a European culture does not give you better morals. Education, emphathy, critical thinking, self-awareness and curiosity in what you can learn from other people/cultures will.

H0; Humans created God(s)
H1; God(s) created humankind.

Based on the law of parsimony (Ockham's razor) and the principle of extraordinary claims requiring substantial proof, I can not accept anything other than H0.

The Goldy-locks theological (appologetics) argument furthermore is handicapped by the lack information to estimate the number of dice-rolls, so can't say if it is "to good to be true"/chance. (Rolling 4 sixes in a row in a series of 10 tries, or within a series of 10 million roles).

And even if there was "a" divine role in creation, i would still argue that a spagetti-monster is no less likely than the image the local priest in your hometown provided.
 
Laatst bewerkt:
Bovenaan Onderaan