[Skeptics] Is religion still relevant ?

[openozy]

2 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Pffft.

Nothing pleases you, does it? lol.

[jmccr8]

I see that this thread has had 5 times the views of it's partner thread and have to wonder how many are by believers. I am only posting in this thread so am going to give an example to believers how they can discuss a subject amongst themselves an use comments here to structure the discussion.

I am going to copy paste a comment from the other thread here that I thought would have been a good starting point for you to work with. I am not naming or quoting who's post it was if you read the thread then you know and the point is to discuss the point made and note the person who made it.

 

 

Religion is an integral part of the history of my people, of my family and of my life. So, from that perspective, it is quite relevant. It defines who, what and how I am. It is relevant in the larger sense because so many people, to varying degrees, hold onto and express belief, Hindus, Christians, Moslems and Jews and all other Faiths, great and small. Religion is Belief in something for which there is no certain knowledge; it is, indeed, a cognitive leap of Faith. 

This is a great post and see the potential for others t discuss and expand on this. Thanks to you know who for saying this.

jmccr8

 

•  

Edited January 28, 2021 by jmccr8
the usual

[psyche101]

10 minutes ago, openozy said:

Nothing pleases you, does it? lol.

Not much no.

[+Sherapy]

33 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

I have a very good friend who is national coordinator of the Australian Anti Ice Campaign. About 80% of the people there are pretty much just how you describe your friend there. 

I often wonder if another path to help was available, how they might turn out. 

Where I see real problems in cases like this is the abandonment of personal accountability. The devil is why they took drugs. God saved them from drugs. It was themselves all along. They have just found a convenient shelf to place blame upon.

Good point.

[Davros of Skaro]

Everybody dance now!

 

[jmccr8]

I have to wonder at the development of a world government and the allowances that would be made in order to achieve it. for religions in order to be under one global authority as I do not think that nations being independent of each other will be as effective for interstellar colonization as working as a whole in the future. If religions adapt to be inclusive I could see that it would still be a part of daily life and for some more choices in life.

jmccr8

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

I see that this thread has had 5 times the views of it's partner thread and have to wonder how many are by believers. I am only posting in this thread so am going to give an example to believers how they can discuss a subject amongst themselves an use comments here to structure the discussion.

I am going to copy paste a comment from the other thread here that I thought would have been a good starting point for you to work with. I am not naming or quoting who's post it was if you read the thread then you know and the point is to discuss the point made and note the person who made it.

 

 

Religion is an integral part of the history of my people, of my family and of my life. So, from that perspective, it is quite relevant. It defines who, what and how I am. It is relevant in the larger sense because so many people, to varying degrees, hold onto and express belief, Hindus, Christians, Moslems and Jews and all other Faiths, great and small. Religion is Belief in something for which there is no certain knowledge; it is, indeed, a cognitive leap of Faith. 

This is a great post and see the potential for others t discuss and expand on this. Thanks to you know who for saying this.

jmccr8

 

•  

I don't find traditional ideas worthy of adhereing to specifically. It's good to record and understand history but I don't feel reliving or maintaining it is always a good thing. This is how people I feel make huge mistakes by not improving on traditional ways. So many people vote how their parents did, so many blindly follow religions they were born into. It's stifling progress and new experiences IMHO. I don't feel that belief is relevant today, but all of history is important to record and understand. 

[Mr Walker]

I am neither sceptic nor believer, and so am barred from commenting in  both threads

 However. this is a brilliant idea and, in just reading this half of the topic.  I have been fascinated by the arguments put forward for  skepticism, and against belief  and the psychological drivers which construct some of them.  

 

[jmccr8]

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

I am neither sceptic nor believer, and so am barred from commenting in  both threads

 However. this is a brilliant idea and, in just reading this half of the topic.  I have been fascinated by the arguments put forward for  skepticism, and against belief  and the psychological drivers which construct some of them.  

 

Hi Walker

yes that is the idea and you are a believer so that would mean you post in the other thread but here is an idea if you like the principal of the dual thread then maybe you would like to be their group leader and get them talking. Like I said you can copy/paste a comment from this thread and take it there but cannot name the author of the post and just discuss the comment. If someone is interested in who said what they can go to the other thread and read it.

jmccr8

Edited January 28, 2021 by jmccr8
I think I need a new eyboard

[jmccr8]

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I don't find traditional ideas worthy of adhereing to specifically. It's good to record and understand history but I don't feel reliving or maintaining it is always a good thing. This is how people I feel make huge mistakes by not improving on traditional ways. So many people vote how their parents did, so many blindly follow religions they were born into. It's stifling progress and new experiences IMHO. I don't feel that belief is relevant today, but all of history is important to record and understand. 

Hi Psche

That is not a simple answer as we can only speak from our own pov and each of us has the same value as 2 legged airbreathers that talk so I cannot discount or devalue that worth to that individual especially if they are not judgmental and do live a decent life and respect the lives of others. What they have learned is that it is personal and do not project a standard that others must accept their belief, In my late teens some of my friends and I would go to this house that 4 nuns lived in and sing we are falling into sin at 2:30 Saturday morning half pie eyed and they would invite us in and play brain twisters with us.

Presonaly just because someone has a belief system isn't a problem for me any more that they like toyota and I like my caddy.

jmccr8

[Tatetopa]

7 hours ago, openozy said:

A bit late after you have murdered people and destroyed countless families from drug distribution. One reason I hate the cover of religion.

I share your sentiment  in connection to Western Religion, but  after you have murdered people and ruined their community might be when hope is needed most. 

There is a conflict set up by our society. Violence can be deplorable and shunned by society or sanctioned as is often the case with war. We tell citizens not to murder or destroy, then we tell them to do it to other people in the cause of war.  I understand you are not talking about conflict between nations, but I believe the effect on individuals  may be the same.

Those who participate in violence in either circumstance often experience negative after-effects sometimes called PTSD.

Western Religion can be  concerned with propriety and outward appearance.  People seem to love a sinner come back into the fold as a demonstration of God's redeeming power  It seems to make many people feel better about their own minor transgressions. That is as relevant now as ever.

Other traditions might focus more on the internal workings of the individual.   The goal would not be to alter how you or I judge, but how the individual deals with everyday life and finds joy still carrying an overwhelming burden of past deeds. Spiritual traditions that can do that are of benefit to the individual

So I suppose group religion or individual  spiritual paths still offer something relevant.  They offer a model of how to compartmentalize past, present, and future, and put one's focus in the present.  

 

[jmccr8]

16 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

I share your sentiment  in connection to Western Religion, but  after you have murdered people and ruined their community might be when hope is needed most. 

There is a conflict set up by our society. Violence can be deplorable and shunned by society or sanctioned as is often the case with war. We tell citizens not to murder or destroy, then we tell them to do it to other people in the cause of war.  I understand you are not talking about conflict between nations, but I believe the effect on individuals  may be the same.

Those who participate in violence in either circumstance often experience negative after-effects sometimes called PTSD.

Western Religion can be  concerned with propriety and outward appearance.  People seem to love a sinner come back into the fold as a demonstration of God's redeeming power  It seems to make many people feel better about their own minor transgressions. That is as relevant now as ever.

Other traditions might focus more on the internal workings of the individual.   The goal would not be to alter how you or I judge, but how the individual deals with everyday life and finds joy still carrying an overwhelming burden of past deeds. Spiritual traditions that can do that are of benefit to the individual

So I suppose group religion or individual  spiritual paths still offer something relevant.  They offer a model of how to compartmentalize past, present, and future, and put one's focus in the present.  

 

Hi Tateopa

Thanks and that is some great input and I hope those in the other thread read this and see that even though some of us argue context and points in past threads that we can still show consideration for how their faith works for them. 

jmccr8

[jmccr8]

I just want to thank Nuke for stepping in to direct members to the appropriate thread much appreciated.

jmccr8

[jmccr8]

I  suspect some who might be believers, but not religious, are scared to post in this thread .

Only 7 individuals posting here, of whom probably 3 are a bit ambivalent   Almost twice that in the other thread, creating a much larger critical mass, engendering discussion 

I must say, while most people's views were always obvious , a  few have surprised me, in the thread they chose. 

I am neither a believer nor a sceptic. I am agnostic on almost every thing,  until I know.

But i keep an open mind to the possibility of anything, and everything, Ie i discount almost nothing as being impossible.  

 

 

This is interesting and I do hope other believers will step up in the believers thread to share their views without fear.

If we can work together to develop the threads I think that we can build avenues of discussion that may in future be less confrontational when gathering in other less specific threads like these two.

jmccr8

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psche

That is not a simple answer as we can only speak from our own pov and each of us has the same value as 2 legged airbreathers that talk so I cannot discount or devalue that worth to that individual especially if they are not judgmental and do live a decent life and respect the lives of others. What they have learned is that it is personal and do not project a standard that others must accept their belief, In my late teens some of my friends and I would go to this house that 4 nuns lived in and sing we are falling into sin at 2:30 Saturday morning half pie eyed and they would invite us in and play brain twisters with us.

Presonaly just because someone has a belief system isn't a problem for me any more that they like toyota and I like my caddy.

jmccr8

Hi Jay

The individual isn't a problem. I agree with that much. A lot of people with beliefs are very nice people. Traditional ideas though can be harmful to society as a whole. Because many gods are revered in a multicultural society, tolerance must have a broad brush. Gods don't like each other it seems, and worshipping a god from the middle east conflicts with the god idea if the west. Then people die. Beliefs in general can invoke god for validity. IMO, gun culture is responsible for too many deaths each year, but the belief that it's a "god given right" blunts any attempt to better the situation. I think to myself, is a thousand happy JWs worth the life of one teen who cannot get a blood transfusion. A bit of education and improvement in tradition could change that. I don't think anything should be followed blindly because it's traditional. We can always improve on everything. It might not seem harmful individually, but I do feel that as a society, there's always a bigger picture. Boundaries are there to be pushed. 

I really can't see how religion is relevant today. It's a comfort, a safety blanket. Redundant for its purpose of founding democracy and order in society. I can't see the world as being worse of without it. I also like to think more people might devote more time to discoveries and understanding things better than keeping old ideas alive. Religion, the paranormal, how many hours have been wasted in such fruitless pursuits? I can't help but wonder if all those hours and brain power couldn't have been put to better use. Surely part of belief must be ego. Some self satisfaction that life's questions are answered. And it's easy. You get the story from many angles all your life and it can be what you want it to be. Instant expert. I can't think of any reason why people would be so defensive of faith otherwise. 

Like you say it depends on the person, but the entire weight of faith I feel is a burden society has to unecessarily bear.

[psyche101]

12 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

I  suspect some who might be believers, but not religious, are scared to post in this thread .

Only 7 individuals posting here, of whom probably 3 are a bit ambivalent   Almost twice that in the other thread, creating a much larger critical mass, engendering discussion 

I must say, while most people's views were always obvious , a  few have surprised me, in the thread they chose. 

I am neither a believer nor a sceptic. I am agnostic on almost every thing,  until I know.

But i keep an open mind to the possibility of anything, and everything, Ie i discount almost nothing as being impossible.  

 

 

This is interesting and I do hope other believers will step up in the believers thread to share their views without fear.

If we can work together to develop the threads I think that we can build avenues of discussion that may in future be less confrontational when gathering in other less specific threads like these two.

jmccr8

Lol 

I don't have to guess who wrote that

I don't think believers are fearful. I think a real believer doesn't bother with discussing their beliefs. I think what that poster is talking about is shame. Some posters have none. Most do, and just sensibly won't approach a lost argument without real evidence for something that's personal anyway. Creationists and flat earther's are pretty vocal and claim they validly challenge real knowledge just as I've noticed certain posters with extraordinary claims and alternative facts do. There's believer posters with great attitudes that are popular with all sorts of posters. They don't fear anyone because there's nothing to fear. It's only people with outrageous claims that think other people are stupid enough to believe (why I have a bugbear about scientology), that claim fear is a factor. I'd be shocked if I found out dan, hammer or DC had any fear about expressing that they have belief. I seriously doubt such had ever crossed their minds. Funny how rational people don't seem to fear belief. Just the ones with very hard to believe claims or quote scripture as fact.

[jmccr8]

2 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Hi Jay

The individual isn't a problem. I agree with that much. A lot of people with beliefs are very nice people. Traditional ideas though can be harmful to society as a whole. Because many gods are revered in a multicultural society, tolerance must have a broad brush. Gods don't like each other it seems, and worshipping a god from the middle east conflicts with the god idea if the west. Then people die. Beliefs in general can invoke god for validity. IMO, gun culture is responsible for too many deaths each year, but the belief that it's a "god given right" blunts any attempt to better the situation. I think to myself, is a thousand happy JWs worth the life of one teen who cannot get a blood transfusion. A bit of education and improvement in tradition could change that. I don't think anything should be followed blindly because it's traditional. We can always improve on everything. It might not seem harmful individually, but I do feel that as a society, there's always a bigger picture. Boundaries are there to be pushed. 

I really can't see how religion is relevant today. It's a comfort, a safety blanket. Redundant for its purpose of founding democracy and order in society. I can't see the world as being worse of without it. I also like to think more people might devote more time to discoveries and understanding things better than keeping old ideas alive. Religion, the paranormal, how many hours have been wasted in such fruitless pursuits? I can't help but wonder if all those hours and brain power couldn't have been put to better use. Surely part of belief must be ego. Some self satisfaction that life's questions are answered. And it's easy. You get the story from many angles all your life and it can be what you want it to be. Instant expert. I can't think of any reason why people would be so defensive of faith otherwise. 

Like you say it depends on the person, but the entire weight of faith I feel is a burden society has to unecessarily bear.

Hi Psyche

Thanks for being honest and giving a fair response.

For some reason I tend to think that it will be through accepting differences on the individual level and creating trust will be how all religions reform. I some countries religion overshadows individuals and the govts of those countries and live in fear of retribution so they have a form of PSTD and we need to recognize some of those influences and engage accordingly if we hope to create a worthwhile exchange. Many times it is not so much what we say but they way we say something  that creates the problem so in a sense if we want others to see the bright side of our position is to make it appealing. Yes some people are stubborn and may tarnish our resolve but if one looks at how many views a topic gets and those people see us engaging productively then that may have a greater impact on them then the one we debate. 

You me and a few others can get quite blunt at times so can say that would be a turn away for some so am interested in trying a different approach and am glad you and others are willing to participate.

jmccr8

 

[quillius]

I wonder where Jordan Peterson would sit with regards the two threads....

he doesn't believe but says if asked whether he is religious :

'I act as if God exists'

 I quite like the stance, I am sure its how many of us live our lives.

[jmccr8]

5 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Lol 

I don't have to guess who wrote that

I don't think believers are fearful. I think a real believer doesn't bother with discussing their beliefs. I think what that poster is talking about is shame. Some posters have none. Most do, and just sensibly won't approach a lost argument without real evidence for something that's personal anyway. Creationists and flat earther's are pretty vocal and claim they validly challenge real knowledge just as I've noticed certain posters with extraordinary claims and alternative facts do. There's believer posters with great attitudes that are popular with all sorts of posters. They don't fear anyone because there's nothing to fear. It's only people with outrageous claims that think other people are stupid enough to believe (why I have a bugbear about scientology), that claim fear is a factor. I'd be shocked if I found out dan, hammer or DC had any fear about expressing that they have belief. I seriously doubt such had ever crossed their minds. Funny how rational people don't seem to fear belief. Just the ones with very hard to believe claims or quote scripture as fact.

Hi Psyche

It does not matter who wrote what as I do not wish to have biases imposed into the discussion, what that person did was express an interest in such a discussion and I feel that because others trust and support him that he would be a reason for others not to be scared to discuss their perspective as to how we will become one people on one planet with different beliefs. I see a lot of religious intolerance between religions and would like to get their input without 2 side arguing about what a dumba$$ the other guy is. We can read and so can they, we can discuss perspectives and not personal biases and yes I know there are issues with some members so let just take an objective view of what unfolds.

jmccr8

[psyche101]

4 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

Thanks for being honest and giving a fair response.

For some reason I tend to think that it will be through accepting differences on the individual level and creating trust will be how all religions reform. I some countries religion overshadows individuals and the govts of those countries and live in fear of retribution so they have a form of PSTD and we need to recognize some of those influences and engage accordingly if we hope to create a worthwhile exchange. Many times it is not so much what we say but they way we say something  that creates the problem so in a sense if we want others to see the bright side of our position is to make it appealing. Yes some people are stubborn and may tarnish our resolve but if one looks at how many views a topic gets and those people see us engaging productively then that may have a greater impact on them then the one we debate. 

You me and a few others can get quite blunt at times so can say that would be a turn away for some so am interested in trying a different approach and am glad you and others are willing to participate.

jmccr8

 

Hi Jay

Blunt? I can't begin to imagine what you're referring to ....

That's interesting, because the way I see it, people bringing religion together ends it. When people realise that another god is just as valid as theirs it's going to be interesting. From what I perceive today, it's more like pity. 

That poor fellow, he seems so lovely, but Catholics mislead him. He will go to hell.

Know what I mean? Shake hands, walk away muttering  I can't see that sense of superiority being thrown aside easily. Not going by how people defend faith today. Religion provides personal self status. To recognise another faith is akin to demotion. Suddenly one is doubting life's answers. One is not an expert anymore. Do we go to heaven after death? Reincarnate, or is there nothing? I think that's a psychological battle most would rather just circumnavigate. And I think that's more how religion survives as opposed to actual relevance. 

Bud, I always enjoy your thoughts. Pleased to offer my pov. Thanks for listening.

Or reading whatever lol

[jmccr8]

13 minutes ago, quillius said:

I wonder where Jordan Peterson would sit with regards the two threads....

he doesn't believe but says if asked whether he is religious :

'I act as if God exists'

 I quite like the stance, I am sure its how many of us live our lives.

Hi Quillius

I don't identify as an atheist or believer, I use god as a descriptor for the ability to think because it is the creator but is not a god it is what we were evolved to eventually do think but for the sake of convenience am representing as non-religious with no god.

jmccr8

[psyche101]

2 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

It does not matter who wrote what as I do not wish to have biases imposed into the discussion, what that person did was express an interest in such a discussion and I feel that because others trust and support him that he would be a reason for others not to be scared to discuss their perspective as to how we will become one people on one planet with different beliefs. I see a lot of religious intolerance between religions and would like to get their input without 2 side arguing about what a dumba$$ the other guy is. We can read and so can they, we can discuss perspectives and not personal biases and yes I know there are issues with some members so let just take an objective view of what unfolds.

jmccr8

Lol mate, I can't thank you enough for the seperation, I'm sure you know what I'm referring to. As you say, less confrontational. 

It doesn't matter, but it's not just the prose. I recognised the first annonymous poster from that, but this one wasn't just prose, it was the view. I don't think it's an average view myself. Which kinda gives it away. That's why I don't think genuine believer posters fear discussion with skeptics. It's a view that is I feel showing annoyance at the hurdles facts put in the way of wild beliefs and the extraordinary claims that tend to accompany such. When you said you hope that posters do not fear posting in the appropriate thread, I don't think that's anything to be too concerned about. Its more mudslinging at skeptics in advance than a genuine concern. The best posters on these boards aren't divided by belief. 

[jmccr8]

5 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Hi Jay

Blunt? I can't begin to imagine what you're referring to ....

That's interesting, because the way I see it, people bringing religion together ends it. When people realise that another god is just as valid as theirs it's going to be interesting. From what I perceive today, it's more like pity. 

That poor fellow, he seems so lovely, but Catholics mislead him. He will go to hell.

Know what I mean? Shake hands, walk away muttering  I can't see that sense of superiority being thrown aside easily. Not going by how people defend faith today. Religion provides personal self status. To recognise another faith is akin to demotion. Suddenly one is doubting life's answers. One is not an expert anymore. Do we go to heaven after death? Reincarnate, or is there nothing? I think that's a psychological battle most would rather just circumnavigate. And I think that's more how religion survives as opposed to actual relevance. 

Bud, I always enjoy your thoughts. Pleased to offer my pov. Thanks for listening.

Or reading whatever lol

Hi Psyche

Lol, I'm Irish and this is my playful education. 

I wouldn't say that I was inferring uniting religions but letting them see that others with no or different beliefs show fear each other I think what will happen is that the more they world diversifies culturally that on an individual basis we can influence their perspective of how we see and treat them if they trust you they will accept you.

Fanatics are another story but really there are a few in the forum that are fanatics that do not represent the majority.

You are always welcome to be a part of the thread you have made many good points and enjoy speaking with you.

jmccr8

 

[openozy]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Those who participate in violence in either circumstance often experience negative after-effects sometimes called PTSD

Some good stuff there Tatetopa. I do think there maybe differences in the personalities of the two groups, the soldier is fighting for freedom or similar where often the outlaw enjoys and seeks out the violence and trouble. I often wonder about PTSD and if say Vikings suffered from this or is it a guilt trip from modern society and it's beliefs.

[psyche101]

4 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

Lol, I'm Irish and this is my playful education. 

4 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

I wouldn't say that I was inferring uniting religions but letting them see that others with no or different beliefs show fear each other I think what will happen is that the more they world diversifies culturally that on an individual basis we can influence their perspective of how we see and treat them if they trust you they will accept you.

There's still that superior issue. Do you think that could be overcome in such a process?

4 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Fanatics are another story but really there are a few in the forum that are fanatics that do not represent the majority

But they do borrow credibility from it, that's the elephant in the room I think. 

4 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

You are always welcome to be a part of the thread you have made many good points and enjoy speaking with you.

jmccr8

 

Cheers bud, I try, most say I'm trying. As I told Hab, I'm a diplomatic guy I will listen but I think that entitles me to a say as well. You may have noticed.....