angelo
Deleted
Mankind is a social animal, always has been. It was the coming together of groups of people that spawned belief in something beyond them.
-
Features
Why would a reasonable person believe in God?
- Thread starter DrZoidberg
- Start date
DrZoidberg
Contributor
Exactly. Another way to put it, we're drawn to each other by our instincts. But we are more comfortable being around one another if we have some common thing to draw us together. But basically we just enjoy each other's company. So we're more than happy to get together based on some wholly manufactured reason. If we introduce an abstract reason, an empty container into which we can just project whatever it is we want to be there, we have found a symbol to gather round that won't offend anybody.
Anyway... that's my theory to why religions and the concept of God came up at all.
angelo
Deleted
I've spoken to an ex moron who told me the hardest part of leaving those crazies was the sense of abandonment he felt in walking away.
Playball40
Veteran Member
Mankind also seems to be the most cruel of the animal species. Hence using religion to kill each other.
DrZoidberg
Contributor
I hear this trope a lot. How are you measuring relative cruelty? The number one threat for any species are members of the same species. Since they're competing for the same resources. It's perfectly normal, in nature, for members of the same species to try to kill one another. Cannibalism is the norm. We're a social species. Religion is a social mechanic. Simply by applying Darwinian mechanics, it should follow that humans would use religion to kill each other.
The fact that humans are able to use religion for something other than killing each other is what needs explaining. The killing is just expected.
Bomb#20
Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2004
- Messages
- 8,697
- Location
- California
- Gender
- It's a free country.
- Basic Beliefs
- Rationalism
Nah. If that were really religion they'd be killing one another over it.
Oh, sorry, you didn't mean football. You meant soccer. Objection withdrawn.
“Hear O Israel” --“Listen, my fellow-Jews!” “Being is our God; Being is one!”…. The only value of monotheism is to make you realize that all being, including every creature – and that means the rock and the blade of grass in your garden as well as your pet lizard and your human neighbor next door – are all one in origin. You come from the same place. You were created in the same great act of love. God takes delight in each form that emerges and bestows God’s own grace upon it. Therefore – and this is the “payoff” line, the only one that really counts: Treat them that way! They are all God’s creatures; they exist only because of the divine presence, the same divine presence that makes you exist. This realization calls upon you to get to know them! Get to love them! Discover the unique divine gift within each of them! Live in amazement at the divine light strewn throughout the world. That’s what it means to be a religious human being.--"A Theology of empathy" / Arthur Green
PyramidHead
Contributor
That's not evident from looking at the world with an unbiased frame of mind. Yeah, it would be nice if everybody thought that way, but they would still all be wrong about it; no love went into the creation of whatever this universe is.
PyramidHead
Contributor
That's hardly surprising. You could just as easily say: there is hate, so the universe must have been a product of hate. It adds nothing to the issue.
Of course. A non-biased study that doesnt rely on any fantasy entities in the sky....
Please refer back to previous posts where the discussion is about Jahve=Being.
Fuck no. You seem as <edit>. Hate and love are in our heads only. They are some of the rules our psyche has to endure. It has nothing to do with the physical universe around us.
Last edited by a moderator:
I see you've completed study of this subject to your own satisfaction. Best of luck in your future endeavors!
Last edited by a moderator:
That's not the case at all. There are many other potential bases for ethical treatment. You could have it founded on the premise that ethical societies outcompete non-ethical ones because the members work together and succeed better, so it's in our own selfish interest to be ethical. You could have it founded on the premise that pain is an inherent negative, so activities that reduce people's pain and ethical in and of themselves. You could have it founded on premise that there are spiritual entities judging our behaviour and rewarding or punishing us based on how we act. The list goes on and on.
Your example is in no way, shape or form the only sound basis for ethical treatment.
A person or community that founds its ethics on the idea of panpsychism will indeed outcompete any other group.
PyramidHead
Contributor
That says nothing about whether or not panpsychism is actually true. It may simply be a fantasy that compels good behavior. In fact, that's what it is.
Which groups and/or people are you referring to and by what percentage did they outcompete those other groups?