• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Is the word "religion" too general?

repoman

Contributor
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
8,590
Location
Seattle, WA
Basic Beliefs
Science Based Atheism
What I mean is, can the word religion being applied to a great variety of "religions" mask the differences between them?

So Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, Karaite Judaism, Scientology, Sikhs and Bahai are all called religions. But they are different in many ways.
 
I suppose these all have the common elements of Religion -
2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
 
I think 'religion' is the attempt to appease an imagined insane, tyrannical Sixth-Century-BC power-crazy, non-ok nutter. Other systems would be better called 'beliefs'.
 
The word works. iolo and DBT pretty much nailed it. But from an everyday point of view, it automatically connotes some belief and dedication to some supernatural entity. Then you begin to narrow it down from there. It's kind of like saying, "I have a car." We all know what a car is, and from there we can ask who the manufacturer is, the model, the year, color, etc. Same with religion.

For example, take Christianity. Lots of people claim that religion, but there are myriad brands of the faith.

"Religion" is a starter word.
 
The word works... It's kind of like saying, "I have a car." We all know what a car is, and from there we can ask who the manufacturer is, the model, the year, color, etc. Same with religion...

I don't recall ever having seen it work that way. Years of IIDB and FRDB, with a strong interest in the religion convos, and that's not how they generally proceeded. An OP can even start with the equivalent of a particular model of car, and from there people will generalize upward to "religion" and how stupid all “religion” is rather than down into the details.

My particular interest in eastern religions made this very obvious to me time and again, because seldom could anything be said about ANY religion without christocentric folk disrupting the possibility of an at least semi-learned conversation. So IME “religion” not a starter word but more of a shutdown word. People rarely want more details, they just see the word "religion" and then the cliches and psychological projections start flying.

When the Euro/American ethnocentrism is pointed out, people resort to: “Doesn’t matter, they’re all the same in the middle”. Then the thing about a "supernatural entity" gets beaten to death, thus demonstrating the very problem that they've denied. Nontheistic concepts like The Tao or Karma are given ‘the treatment’, where a comparison to Jehovah is strained until the chance of a charitable and honest comprehension is gone.

There’s nearly nothing we can say about “religion” that applies to all religions. They are not all theistic. They do not all necessarily entail supernaturalism. They do not all worship an anthropomorphic “entity” whether supernaturalistic or naturalistic (to the extent the distinction means anything). They do not all involve blind faith. No one religion is homogeneous as even within a single “religion” there’s a wealth of diversity.

Maybe the only shared characteristic is devout veneration of something seen as greater than one’s individual self (as at least an ideal if the devotion's somewhat lacking in some religious folk). Or a practice to realize identity with that greater something.
 
Religion is superstition at the group level.

"a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation"

Thank-you Merriam Webster.
 
A set of myths constructed as means to provide solace for those who find reality unpalatable....?

Which also benefits the ruling class because it allows a hierarchy of social control to develop.
 
Religion is superstition at the group level.

"a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation"

Thank-you Merriam Webster.

I am fairly comfortable with this definition; but it does encompass a lot of beliefs that many people would not describe as 'religion' (although maybe they should), like nationalism; racism; opposition to vaccination and/or genetic engineering; conspiracy theories; alien abduction tales; chiropractic; horoscopes; climate change denial; and all manner of irrational woo crap - even many variants of sports and celebrity fandom.
 
Back
Top Bottom