religion

[Collinsworthington]

i like to call myself a christian just for the family, but honestly im agnostic-athiest, i don't have a problem with religion, because there may be something out there there might not, i dont know and i dont act like i do... but i feel like if religion never existed hundreds of millions of lives would not have been lost in wars over the years, granted it wouldn't be peaceful because of trade and land, etc. but far less conflict, we would be probably 60-100 years more developed.... idk just ranting, what do u think?

[phuckphace]

Western civilization made many of its greatest achievements at a time when most people believed in a God who created everything in 6 literal days (deal with it!). but le Reddit says we just played with flint tools in caves until Richard Dawkins came down from atheist heaven last Thursday and brought us high technology with one touch of his noodly appendage so I guess that's what happened

[Broken Toy]

Actually, this is often overlooked but the world would be in chaos if there were no religion. Laws would never be made if not for religion, as there would be no reason to follow them. It is this fear of hell that has made laws, and people obeyed them to please their god. Nowadays, people have developed empathy and a conscience, so laws are followed for different reasons. If religion is a lie, it is obsolete because we can conduct ourselves based on our conscience, but if there were no religion, the world would be only for oneself and there would be no complex civilisation

[Plane And Simple]

This will turn to a debate very soon, so in advance:

TWPR :arrow2: ROTW

[Stronk Serb]

Actually, this is often overlooked but the world would be in chaos if there were no religion. Laws would never be made if not for religion, as there would be no reason to follow them. It is this fear of hell that has made laws, and people obeyed them to please their god. Nowadays, people have developed empathy and a conscience, so laws are followed for different reasons. If religion is a lie, it is obsolete because we can conduct ourselves based on our conscience, but if there were no religion, the world would be only for oneself and there would be no complex civilisation

Bullshit, it's the fear of punishment that keeps people in line, not some millenial storybook character. Laws would exist, they would be enforced. Besides, how come crime still existed if, by your words people were shitting their pants when someone mentions godly wrath.

[Microcosm]

Actually, this is often overlooked but the world would be in chaos if there were no religion. Laws would never be made if not for religion, as there would be no reason to follow them. It is this fear of hell that has made laws, and people obeyed them to please their god. Nowadays, people have developed empathy and a conscience, so laws are followed for different reasons. If religion is a lie, it is obsolete because we can conduct ourselves based on our conscience, but if there were no religion, the world would be only for oneself and there would be no complex civilisation

"we cannot conduct ourselves based on our conscience" is entirely wrong. Your whole argument was based around that as well. It's wrong because we (in a materialistic sense) can assume that we have some recognition of what is right and wrong, and we do actually have that. Yes, morality is subjective. However, there are basic laws we set in place which we try to avoid breaking because some particular action is sensed to be wrong. It's sort of just "common-sense ethics" as I once heard it put.

Anyways, the entire field of ethical philosophy is dedicated to finding out what we ought and ought not to do in a materialistic world(i.e. not bringing God into it).

I sort of see where you're coming from, though, on the whole "fear of Hell" thing.

Nowadays, it is actually possible to establish a moral system without a God. Most people overlook that and say "without God, there is no morality." This isn't really true. Religion has played a very important role in establishing a lot of morals today that are intertwined with our culture. However, it is now simply no longer necessary to have a religion in this world to explain morality. It's helpful, I suppose to people who more easily follow rules when they are threatened to act a certain way, but for someone like me who knows how to basically establish a moral system(and most people are like this, like 90-95% of people) and follow it properly, it isn't a necessity.

[Broken Toy]

Rainbow Dash

Yeah thats my point, it isnt necessary now but was and its been present for so long it is hard to move past it. Also, it has never been disproven, as people think its science vs religion, when they infact compliment eachother (sometimes)
Svarog

If its bullshit, explain why i shouldnt beat someone up and steal from them, or why i shouldnt kill someone. Animals are killed for food, if i ate the person is that equal? If i need what the person has, is that right because i need it.

Explain why these acts are wrong, and it cant come back to the fact they were obeyed out of fear of god.

[Vlerchan]

Laws would never be made if not for religion, as there would be no reason to follow them. It is this fear of hell that has made laws, and people obeyed them to please their god. Nowadays, people have developed empathy and a conscience, so laws are followed for different reasons.
In the morning I'll go find the research that demonstrates that human beings tend to have an inherent inclination towards being emphatic. It's not something that just appeared in the 1600s alongside secularism.

There's also lots of reasons to behave in-line with law. In particular is the threat of organised violence.

If its bullshit, explain why i shouldnt beat someone up and steal from them, or why i shouldnt kill someone.
There exists forces that ensure such behavior is not in your self-interest.

Animals are killed for food, if i ate the person is that equal?
Please note that the idea that humans are more emphatic fails to explain this too.

Though it's tangential at best to the topic.

---

Anyways, the entire field of ethical philosophy is dedicated to finding out what we ought and ought not to do in a materialistic world(i.e. not bringing God into it).
Ethics is an inherently anti-materialist (idealist) occupation and isn't concerned with the material world at all.

[Broken Toy]

Vlerchan you haunter of the ROTW, thought you'd gone for a while.

Can we agree that religion has been really helpful?

Anyway, i actually based that off my own thoughts, because when i thought about how religion has shaped law and society, i thought that i would have no problem killing someone were the law not in place. Im going to say thats not mentally healthy then if humans tend to not do that by nature? Oops.

[Left Now]

Well I really do not completely know what religion means in Western Social Language,but as I am aware the time law was introduced in Iranic places,religion was introduced alongside it.Actually the thing which people call it religion just meant discipline in the past.Later metaphysics and others were added to it according to legends and local stories of people in different places.

Actually if want to understand why religions and their similar and different traditions and laws were created,we have to take a look at Natural Selection theory in Biology.

[Judean Zealot]

i like to call myself a christian just for the family, but honestly im agnostic-athiest, i don't have a problem with religion, because there may be something out there there might not, i dont know and i dont act like i do... but i feel like if religion never existed hundreds of millions of lives would not have been lost in wars over the years, granted it wouldn't be peaceful because of trade and land, etc. but far less conflict, we would be probably 60-100 years more developed.... idk just ranting, what do u think?

I'm just gonna mention here that the most destructive wars of human history have practically nothing to do with religion. Both world wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the Greek and Roman Wars of expansion...

War is caused by greed, lust, or a disparity of resources. Very few wars have been truly caused by religion.

[Left Now]

I'm just gonna mention here that the most destructive wars of human history have practically nothing to do with religion. Both world wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the Greek and Roman Wars of expansion...

War is caused by greed, lust, or a disparity of resources. Very few wars have been truly caused by religion.

War is caused by similarities.Differences just make disagreements.

[Judean Zealot]

War is caused by similarities.Differences just make disagreements.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're saying. Can you explain this a little further?

[Left Now]

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're saying. Can you explain this a little further?

Well it is simple my friend.Differences of beliefs are not causes of conflicts,but similarities of them are.Differences will only make disagreements,but this is the similarities of humans that they think they are always right and the best which make them get into conflicts with each others.

Religions are just differences,so they only can make disagreements.Disagreements themselves can improve thoughts and beliefs,but conflicts can mostly just ruin.

[Judean Zealot]

Well it is simple my friend.Differences of beliefs are not causes of conflicts,but similarities of them are.Differences will only make disagreements,but this is the similarities of humans that they think they are always right and the best which make them get into conflicts with each others.

Religions are just differences,so they only can make disagreements.Disagreements themselves can improve thoughts and beliefs,but conflicts can mostly just ruin.

Ahh, I see what you're saying now. My point, however, is that even where ideas are invoked as the causes of conflict they rarely are in fact the true causes.

[Stronk Serb]

Svarog

If its bullshit, explain why i shouldnt beat someone up and steal from them, or why i shouldnt kill someone. Animals are killed for food, if i ate the person is that equal? If i need what the person has, is that right because i need it.

Explain why these acts are wrong, and it cant come back to the fact they were obeyed out of fear of god.

Laws and rules were made in ancient times to ensure community productivity and stability. We don't need religion for empathy and althruism. You have many atheists who were raised atheist who are emphatetic and altruistic, yet you have Christians raising donations to deliver Bibles to the starving in Africa. Aside from use as toilet paper, the starving would find no use since many are illiterate and Bibles are inedible.

[Microcosm]

Vlerchan,

yes, ethics is in some sense "anti-materialist," but the point I was trying to make was that much of it doesn't require religion. It tries to explain ethical behavior using pure logic. That was my intentional message.

[Babs]

Yes, religion was the cause of many wars. But it was also an important part of culture and civilization. Both those aspects are important to consider. Being too militantly pro or anti religion is never a good thing, imo.

[Collinsworthington]

Yes, religion was the cause of many wars. But it was also an important part of culture and civilization. Both those aspects are important to consider. Being too militantly pro or anti religion is never a good thing, imo.

i disagree, of course religion has shaped our culture, but thats because weve always had it, in 2050 a few european countries r supposed to be non religious majority, we'll see then i guess but we can only debate now

[Vlerchan]

It tries to explain ethical behavior using pure logic.
This isn't the case at all. In the best cases people deduce through logic ethical values from broad and presumed principals.

---

In the case of culture, what's not realised is the extent to which religious principles have been secularised, and considered as non-religious principals.

For that reason, some aspect of religion is going to remain.

[Microcosm]

This isn't the case at all. In the best cases people deduce through logic ethical values from broad and presumed principals.

---

In the case of culture, what's not realised is the extent to which religious principles have been secularised, and considered as non-religious principals.

For that reason, some aspect of religion is going to remain.

These "broad and presumed" principals are typically ones that evolved from religion or religious principals. If that's what you're saying, I agree.

[Vlerchan]

These "broad and presumed" principals are typically ones that evolved from religion or religious principals. If that's what you're saying, I agree.
Nah. What I'm claiming is that ethics isn't based in pure logic.

I also think it's more likely that religions grew from certain ethical principals, as opposed to the other way around.