Dragaera

The Religion Debate

Fri Nov 29 01:26:22 PST 2002

Lydia Nickerson wrote:
> At 12:04 AM -0600 11/29/02, Gametech wrote:
>> Lydia Nickerson wrote:
>>>  At 12:33 AM -0600 11/28/02, Gametech wrote:
>>>>  David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>>>>  <snip>
>>>>
>>>>  however you lose the benefit of them believing
>>>>  other good things as a side affect of that belief
>>>
>>>  This is religion's Big Lie.  People can be moral and kind and
>>> decent  without the least bit of help from any supernatural source
>>> or belief.  I get this constantly.  "How do you decide what's right
>>> and wrong, if  you don't believe in God?" Well, actually, roughly
>>> the way everybody  else does, if they were paying attention to the
>>> way they really live  their lives rather than how they think they
>>> live their lives.  I  operate on the "if it hurts, I'm probably
>>> doing this wrong"  principal.  Empathy is not a virtue instilled by
>>> religious practice;  it is something that is part of the normal
>>> experience of being human.  Wanting to prevent pain is one of the
>>> pillars of moral behavior.  Recognizing that one's behavior has
>>> consequences is another.  Neither  one of these needs the least
>>> reference to the Invisible world.
>>>
>>
>> What I was saying about losing the benefit of... was an argument why
>> religion isn't all bad and does help some people towards positive
>> things. I was in NO way saying people aren't capable of it without
>> religion, not in the least. I was just stating that as a side affect
>> of people believing in their religion they often practice positive
>> values in their daily lives.
>
> You are also assuming that if those people didn't have religion, they
> wouldn't be behaving that way.  If they would behave in the same
> fashion without religion, then religion is irrelevant.  I think that
> religion actually does harm by taking credit for the natural good in
> normal human beings.  It diminishes our self esteem, which in turn
> diminishes our competence.
>

Religion isn't taking credit for anything near as I can tell, religion
functions like a school does in many ways.



>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>  What is so Awfully wrong about religion that counter's in it's
>>>>  entirety the good aspects of it?
>>>
>>>  What does religion have to offer that I wasn't born with, already?
>>
>> I hesitate in answering that question because I don't really care if
>> you believe in *a* religion, but I've been trying to keep the point
>> that religion itself is not entirely or even mostly a bad thing
>> based on the good it does. It's like anything else you can take it
>> or leave it.
>
> Well, no, not really.  Children get raised in religions, and that
> profoundly affects them all their lives.  It informs societal norms
> and customs, it infects our laws. Religion is not an individual
> thing, it is a community thing.  It affects the way people interact
> with each other.  Which means that I _can't_ take it or leave it.  It
> gets shoved in my face constantly.  It affects what I can buy on what
> days of the week.  It is a huge factor in whether or not I have the
> right to make choices about medical procedures for myself.
>

I stated before I was born into a religion, and don't feel this way, it is a
personal choice you *can take it or leave it* you feel that you can't but
you very well have the ability to make that choice don't you?

> You are arguing that not everything that was done in the name of
> religion was evil, and that not everyone who has ever been religious
> is bad or stupid.  That's shifting ground, trying to turn this into
> an always/never argument.  I'm not talking about a binary religious
> state, on/off, yes/no, always/never.  What I'm saying is that
> religion does not offer any unique advantages.  Religion cannot offer
> humans anything they don't already have in their bones, but it can
> alienate them from the ownership of those same virtues, as well as
> teach people to believe in things that they cannot prove, indeed
> cannot see, to :"reason" using arbitrary givens without reference to
> the real world.  That is such a huge disadvantage that it would
> overcome many advantages, but religion doesn't even offer any
> advantages.  It's just basically a bad idea.
>

Because religion originates from humans it is a human thing it is something
we don't have in our bones that we created because we didn't

> Just to confuse people, and myself, I'll also say that I have several
> RC friends and I understand their attachment to the Church, and I
> understand their faith.  I can see the beauty and value of liturgy,
> religious practice, prayer, and faith.  I see it more, though, like
> someone who has taken up a very serious artform.  They are practicing
> something beautiful and important that goes all the way to their
> center.  That view of religion doesn't require a belief in God,
> actually; it merely requires an appreciation of the artform of
> religion.  That, I have.  Inb the same sense that I think that
> beautiful music is of general benefit, so I think that beautiful
> religion is of general benefit.  I just wish people didn't believe it
> quite so...literally.
>
>
>>
>> Maybe Purpose? Something to dedicate their life to?
>
> *shrug*  Live and love?  Such a short time to be here and such a long
> time to be gone?  Afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted?
> Peace and justice?  There are purposes a-plenty.  Pick one.

right and one of them is religion for some people
>
>> There are people whom
>> just aren't creative thinking, who need to follow others and who
>> need to have "don't kill, be nice to strangers, take care of your
>> body, etc."  told to them,
>
> I do not believe that.  I think that people probably need to be
> taught about abstracts like property rights, at least in societies
> that have them, and some of the other social norms, like wearing
> clothes outside the house, but the serious basics are there, unless
> a) there's actual brain damage, in which case that person is fucked,
> or b) that child is damaged while being raised, in which case it
> depends on how bad the damage is whether or not that person is
> irrevocably fucked.  And this is precisely what I mean about religion
> taking away our ownership of our own virtues.  These are not things
> that need to be taught.  How those virtues play out in the complex
> lattice of the society in which a person lives does need to be taught.
>
Though you may not acknowledge it there are in fact many people whom
creative thinking isn't a skill of theirs, and do benifit from the rest of
whom are. Why doesn't eveyone write? Produce art? Explore Philosophy?

>>  I think religion may symbolize hope to many people, you were born
>> with the ability to hope but with no particular purpose. Also people
>> subscribe to a certain religion because its core beliefs are similar
>> to their own so it is a way of associating with people whom have
>> some similar views.
>
> They could join their equivalent of fandom.  Trainspotters do much
> the same for each other.  Humans are gregarious creatures, we have to
> live in communities.  The key is to gather together and work for a
> common cause.  There's no particular value to having that goal be
> spiritual or magical, and the spiritual/magical has extra problems
> that organizing around, say, food aid for Nicauragua does not.
>
>
I agree! It doesn't matter what it is really imagine this argument from the
flip and insert any of those options instead of religion and ask me to
defend it and I will in the same manner!

>>
>> Religion is a very social thing I don't really see how it can
>> correctly be compared to what it has that you didn't when you were
>> born, it doesn't possess anything (avoid the obvious witty comment)
>> it's more like a tool that is useful for as long as the wielder
>> needs to learn the positive things and practice them for the rest of
>> his/her life.
>
> I am arguing that it is a redundant tool.  People can find value,
> meaning, virtue, joy, purpose, hope, pride, and community without
> religion, and religion doesn't add anything to the mix of extra
> value, though it does extract a price.
>
It isn't redundant because it has it's own unique qualities as does other
similar ideas.

>>
>> Religion isn't responsible for anything People
>> are.
>
> You must not have been raised in a seriously religious family.  Trust
> me.  Religion can, indeed, be a profound part of who people are,
> whether they want to or not.  i was raised in a Calvinist church, and
> I have a very Calvinist outlook on life, fight it though I do.  You
> are taking too narrow a view of what people are and how they interact
> with the world, in my opinion.  Who you are is, in part, who you've
> been and what you've experienced.
>
The level of influece you need to fight is the 'dumb shit' aspect I don't
find that hard to do at all, and your horrid assumption about the level of
religious ness of my family is founded on the fact you want to make a better
point and not in reality, to my family the religion was Very forefront, I
hope you take my word on that.

> Lydy Nickerson lydy at demesne.com lydy at lydy.com
> Dulciculi Aliquorum