[Skeptics] Is religion still relevant ?

[Hyperionxvii]

6 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Where I grew up religion was only one of many ways for fistical entertainment, we would fight if you wore you jeans tucked into your cowboy boots or pulled over and it was no inconvenience to drive 30 miles to find someone who did. Guys fought just because they were from the town down the road in any direction so I am pretty sure people will find something to disagree about no matter what,

jmccr8

LOL. Reminds me of my teen days. There would be a fight every day at  the high school and the chances of you being involved was about 100%. 

[jmccr8]

5 minutes ago, Hyperionxvii said:

LOL. Reminds me of my teen days. There would be a fight every day at  the high school and the chances of you being involved was about 100%. 

jmccr8

[jmccr8]

Just because of the last few posts I am going to say is that from the onset of these threads that I do not think that religion (management excluded) itself iis the cause of all the problems that we have to overcome but personal interpretations of individuals do have an effect on all the aspects of conflicts be the peaceful or not.

jmccr8

Edited January 30, 2021 by jmccr8
not sure but did it anyway

[jmccr8]

3 hours ago, Sherapy said:

folks who walk the talk

Hi Sherapy

This is not unique to religion either though as I get all kinds of advice in different things so my first reaction is to see if the talk is represented in their life. If someone comes to me telling me to invest in this or do that with my money and I do not see that they have personally profited by following the advice that they gave and apply the same reasoning in all aspects.

jmccr8

[Tatetopa]

4 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Tatetopa

Yes and if we get to the point that we are exploring the universe we should make sure that we can resolve differences to reach higher goals. Not sure how things would go if we ran into another intelligent lifeform if we have not resolved or differences here on this planet.

Probably not well for us.

There is a scale for civilizations in astrobiology.  We haven't even made it to Type I yet.    I suspect we need to evolve our social awareness to encompass billions of people as a community.  We seem to have been progressing up the scale from family groups to tribes, to nations, to massive nations of a billion or so citizens.  Just a thought, perhaps religion is one way to help us along that  climb without exterminating each other.

The Kardashev scale is a method of measuring a civilization's level of technological advancement based on the amount of energy they are able to use. The measure was proposed by Soviet astronomer Nikolai Kardashev in 1964.^[1] The scale has three designated categories:

• A Type I civilization, also called a planetary civilization—can use and store all of the energy available on its planet.
• A Type II civilization, also called a stellar civilization—can use and control energy at the scale of its planetary system.
• A Type III civilization, also called a galactic civilization—can control energy at the scale of its entire host galaxy.

[jmccr8]

 

copy/paste from believers thread

Other than fringe fanatics, I know of no major issues among Christian denominations--even Catholic and Easter Orthodox have reconciled and lifted their mutual excommunications. Anti-Zionism is a problem that drags the larger Jewish Diaspora into it and exacerbates Jewish-Islamic tensions. In fact, practically every Islamic country with borders with a non Islamic country has some sort of issue or conflict with their neighbor and visa versa, The major worldwide issues are the historic ones between Islam and Christianity. 

 

I like this, and it does apply to what I was saying about greater integration, here we have done better than they have in Middle East in some aspect as we do have other issues like racism that still need to progress productively by all parties. I am not sure what the ethnic diversity is in some of those countries but will look, but pretty sure that western people are not much of a registration on the demographic there they do not have the choices that they can have here. I think if people were allowed to have the same benefit there that we have here then there would be less radicals and still have their faith and willing to accept others equally as individuals and express it in their lives.

jmccr8

Edited January 30, 2021 by jmccr8
added context

[jmccr8]

7 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Just a thought, perhaps religion is one way to help us along that  climb without exterminating each other.

Hi  Tatetopa

Yes that is a potential although all religions would have to adapt and evolve with each other in order to do that as they really do not need to be in conflict. Whether a person choses to have a religion should not be and issue either and I think that if non-believers saw believers and vice versa as equals then we could resolve most issues. Many of us that are not believers do not have a problem with them having a belief but in tis forum we see a lot if conflict which shows low conflict resolution skills that are sadly needed. The reason for these threads each is a book that writes the other book if it works properly. Ideas can be presented nd discussed without conflict so the other side can read and hopefully get a better picture of how each side feels/thinks about the future and how they each side engage each other without involving negative personal comments.

jmccr8

[psyche101]

On 1/28/2021 at 11:02 PM, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

I hope it isn't going to go that way for them as they are representing and should show some respect for each other as they don't all share the same beliefs so may not want to confront someone that they see as an allies against us and would like to see them engage each other without us. 

Of course many of us do hold like positions but that does not define why we have those positions individually and most of the usual members are watching rather that engaging and may enter if there is enough activity to garner discussion.

jmccr8

It would not be the first time I've seen the religious turn on each other when skeptics are hard to find. There's a competitive nature to religion which again I think had a lot to do with life's answers and the comfort that comes with the belief that they are answered. 

Any change to that belief I feel begins a process of resentment. It just takes longer when there's a common enemy to disperse of. I'll be interested to see if the religious thread ends up with people of faith turning on people of faith when skeptics are non existent. 

[psyche101]

On 1/28/2021 at 11:25 PM, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

I'm still typing with 2 finger so am a bit slow.

Come on mate, pick it up. I'm using one finger on a phone.

Quote

I think if people chose to be accepting of each other on the individual basis it will weaken the complex of superiority on it's own with it's own members, thee are a lot of people that identify with Christianity but are new age and the religious structure fractures with their losses with integration of cultures ones sees other aspects other than religious that have a lot of value in a society and recognizing that is a step in acceptance. I see people scarfing down food from different cultures then hear them talking crap about their culture without knowing what that culture actually is about.

True some hold more abstract views than others but you see that in every aspect of life as well so it is not unique to religion, In this thread they cannot say anything although they can peak their mind in the other thread, I know not all of them agree with fanatics and am sure would express their thoughts in counter if that part of this thread concept works. They can see what we are saying and for the most part no one is actually speaking down to or against anyone and if they are objective and read what we are saying maybe they will come out and make this interesting

jmccr8

Cheers back 

Yes I know I put a silk bag on my sledgehammer the other night.

jmccr8

New age structure I think does have value, I'll agree with that. Whilst I've said spirituality is just a way to hang onto religion, it strikes me as one small step away from it at the same time. Reason is starting to question cultural tradition and theocratic teachings. That can only be a good thing if we are using our brains more. 

The bolded, yeah, nail on the head, that's exactly where I was going. That's the sort of ignorance that religion breeds which is a really bad aspect of it, and an elephant in the room. Nobody wants to consider another god as real or valid but will do so to worship their own chosen "true god". That's the space where contempt breeds.

[psyche101]

On 1/28/2021 at 11:40 PM, quillius said:

Hey Psyche,

this reminded me of our old friend Boony ...... super intelligent guy, great poster......hardened skeptic yet he was religious.....

 

Crikey that's going back.

That's just before I identified as atheist I think. 

I mentioned that I wasn't always atheist to white crane feather and he said he flat out didn't believe that. 

Wonder what he is up to. Boon I mean. Haven't heard from him since that other forum closed. 

Edited January 30, 2021 by psyche101

[+Nuclear Wessel]

8 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Crikey that's going back.

That's just before I identified as atheist I think. 

I mentioned that I wasn't always atheist to white crane feather and he said he flat out didn't believe that. 

Wonder what he is up to. Haven't heard from him since that other forum closed. 

Ah, good ol' cafe.

Great forum.

He became a mod there IIRC.

Edited January 30, 2021 by Nuclear Wessel

[psyche101]

2 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

Ah, good ol' cafe.

Great forum.

I left on account of the judge. That jerk was a class a dick. One of the most arrogant idiot aholes on the net. That prick could give Hab ahole lessons. If they banned him it would have been a good forum. 

Edited January 30, 2021 by psyche101

[+Nuclear Wessel]

2 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

I left on account of the judge. That jerk was a class a dick. One of the most arrogant idiot aholes on the net. That prick could give Hab ahole lessons. 

I distinctly recall wanting to reach through one poster's computer screen and...

... give them a hug. Yes. That's it.

Pretty sure it was that guy. I can't recall much aside that I did enjoy some of the topics of discussion, but I do vaguely recall a prick of sorts.

Also--do you have PMs disabled? I tried sending you one a while back.

Edited January 30, 2021 by Nuclear Wessel

[psyche101]

55 minutes ago, Nuclear Wessel said:

I distinctly recall wanting to reach through one poster's computer screen and...

... give them a hug. Yes. That's it.

Pretty sure it was that guy. I can't recall much aside that I did enjoy some of the topics of discussion, but I do vaguely recall a prick of sorts.

Also--do you have PMs disabled? I tried sending you one a while back.

No, it's probably full again. Cheers I'll get around to it

[+Nuclear Wessel]

Just now, psyche101 said:

No, it's probably full again. Cheers I'll get around to it

Christ on a Cross... you get a lot of fanmail?

Hate mail? LOL

[jmccr8]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I didn't see it, but I'm thankful to have open discussions free of that W poster commandeering the thread for his own purposes 

He's really annoyed about it too. So is Will. That's gold in itself. 

Hi Psyche

Even though I laughed the rule is not to identify other posters.

jmccr8

[jmccr8]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

The bolded, yeah, nail on the head, that's exactly where I was going. That's the sort of ignorance that religion breeds which is a really bad aspect of it, and an elephant in the room. Nobody wants to consider another god as real or valid but will do so to worship their own chosen "true god". That's the space where contempt breeds.

Hi Psyche

I don't have to accept that any god is real or valid unless it becomes something that I have an experience with but I do accept that t is real and valid to the believer and do respect that. I have never asked anyone or tried to turn anyone away from their belief. I do question some of the concepts brought up here because questions arise and for a believer I am interested in why they came to believe and many times we are not even talking about religion it is interesting as to the positions they express.

I don't try to win anything here but some people get my sense of humor going.

jmccr8

Edited January 30, 2021 by jmccr8
spulling

[Tatetopa]

5 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Yes that is a potential although all religions would have to adapt and evolve with each other in order to do that as they really do not need to be in conflict. Whether a person choses to have a religion should not be and issue either and I think that if non-believers saw believers and vice versa as equals then we could resolve most issues. Many of us that are not believers do not have a problem with them having a belief but in tis forum we see a lot if conflict which shows low conflict resolution skills that are sadly needed. The reason for these threads each is a book that writes the other book if it works properly. Ideas can be presented nd discussed without conflict so the other side can read and hopefully get a better picture of how each side feels/thinks about the future and how they each side engage each other without involving negative personal comments.

I would like to make a distinction here.  Organized religions evolve and change as society does.  They are a tool of governance and often conflict.  Individual spirituality is independent of society, it may be closer to timeless.  It may change only as rapidly as the structure of our brains.

  I have know spiritual people in my life.  The best are a joy to be around,  and it hasn't seemed to matter what religious approach they took.  They seem to share a confidence in their place in the world that does not require them to share, compare, judge, or explain; just live.  Its hard to have serious conflicts about the unknown and ineffable nature of our lives.  In spiritual matters, your guess is as good as mine.  We can get along without conflict.

When the same personal faith that is applied to charting the spiritual unknown is then applied to explaining the physical world, or human activity  it encounters events observable by many.  Not every belief about the nature of the world is borne out by facts. When someone hangs too dearly to their theory and is unwilling to give it up after it has been contradicted by facts, conflict can ensue.  Not every theory about man and the universe is equal.  Some are just dead a$$ wrong.

 

[eight bits]

8 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I left on account of the judge.

Same "judge" (the exact form of the user name varied a little from place to place) as used to troll the old Randi forum?

I left when it changed ownership. There were some good arguments-discussions there, but I have no idea why the mods put up with the "judge's" hot and cold running crap.

8 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Whilst I've said spirituality is just a way to hang onto religion, it strikes me as one small step away from it at the same time. Reason is starting to question cultural tradition and theocratic teachings. That can only be a good thing if we are using our brains more. 

I'm glad to see you're deepening your position on spirituality, distinguishing it more from religion. I'm fairly confident that what I "get out of" going off in the woods, preferably with a dog or two (congenial humans are welcome, too) is very similar to what "spiritual people" get out of their practices.

As I've said in other threads, I, too, walk with angels, but the ones with me leave footprints. A feature, not a bug, IMO.

And Jay.

You can't fool me. After a few failed attempts to cage the Kraken, you finally hit upon building a fence around us to keep the Kraken out. Perhaps it was a wee bit callous to leave all those innocent believers outside the fence to fend for themselves, but hey, ...

You're a sly one

[jmccr8]

9 minutes ago, eight bits said:

You can't fool me. After a few failed attempts to cage the Kraken, you finally hit upon building a fence around us to keep the Kraken out. Perhaps it was a wee bit callous to leave all those innocent believers outside the fence to fend for themselves, but hey, ...

You're a sly one

Hi Eight bits

Ahem, it's research and the data is still coming in on one side.

jmccr8

[+joc]

7 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Psyche

Even though I laughed the rule is not to identify other posters.

jmccr8

So...jmccr8...I apologize for things I said earlier...I was just expressing anger...a normal function...in the wrong place, at the wrong time, to the wrong person, because if we search our psyche for the sources of our anger, we often find that anger seldom originates from the source we think it does. 

That being said...just one tiny, itsy, witsy rant...not to identify other posters but @psyche101, @Sherapy, @eight bits....and yes... @jmccr8...you guys are the very ones who agg on previously mentioned members by incessantly quoting them and calling them out.  You share equal partnership in the derailment of threads which  become totally about them...When really all you have to do is push that ignore button. ...then you experience bliss... Nuff said.  You know I love all you guys! 

Back to the topic...and I am not a skeptic...I am a non-believer.   Imho, it all really does come down to understanding the psychology of belief.  Believers ...believe...that what they believe is true.  One cannot believe something they think is false.  From personal experience...we know that the moment we tell another person that they are wrong...conflict is created.  Because no one likes to be invalidated and these religious beliefs are so incredibly personal.  

As to the question of relevancy?  There are 1.2 billion Catholics, 1.8 billion Muslims, and 800 million Protestant Christians on the planet.  That is roughly half of the planet.  The majority of the other half belief in something Spiritual that isn't defined by the mainstream religions. Most Catholics are not converted, they are born Catholic.  Same with most Muslims, and the same with most Protestant Christians.  So, belief is quite relevant in our world.  Belief is generational, it is personal.   Therefore...it is relevant.  It isn't going away.  The best way, imo to 'get along' with that other half of the world is just to accept that people believe things which are not true...and let them.  And that really pretty much is all I  have to say on the subject.

[eight bits]

1 hour ago, joc said:

You share equal partnership

I'll cop to junior partnership.

As a badge holder, as you are and I once was, I'm sure you'll appreciate that discussion of why this or that thread becomes the object of moderator or administrator action is ... discouraged ...

Which leaves me in the uncomfortable position of standing accused with some real constraints on what I might say in my defense.

So there it must stay, I think. One thing, though. I have at least the consolation of sharing the dock with some of the finest posters on this site.

There's a line in Band of Brothers, where decades after WW II, a grandchild asks "Were you a hero in the war, grandpa?" And grandpa answers, "No, but I served in a company of heroes."

Thanks, Joc. You made my day.

[+Liquid Gardens]

3 hours ago, joc said:

That being said...just one tiny, itsy, witsy rant...not to identify other posters but @psyche101, @Sherapy, @eight bits....and yes... @jmccr8...you guys are the very ones who agg on previously mentioned members by incessantly quoting them and calling them out.  You share equal partnership in the derailment of threads which  become totally about them...

Yes, stop with this discussing things on discussion forums!  The nerve...

Just mostly kidding joc, I just had my near annual viewing of Dr Strangelove a week ago and your comment brought this to mind:

 

[+Liquid Gardens]

14 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Wonder what he is up to. Boon I mean. Haven't heard from him since that other forum closed.

Yea boony was great, one of the first posters I interacted with here, we had some fine tag teams in the heyday of 9/11 conspiracy debates on UM.  Definitely was a bummer when he left.

[+Liquid Gardens]

5 hours ago, eight bits said:

I'm glad to see you're deepening your position on spirituality, distinguishing it more from religion. I'm fairly confident that what I "get out of" going off in the woods, preferably with a dog or two (congenial humans are welcome, too) is very similar to what "spiritual people" get out of their practices.

You've got the triumvirate of activities beneficial to your wellbeing going there:  exercise, nature, and doggo fun.  Just one of those is a boost.

I agree with you on the similarity in benefits to those from spirituality, but always have trouble then coming up with what distinguishes them.  On the one hand, the spirituality that I think psyche is referring to that you noted was something different from religion is itself another step removed I think from the potential spirituality of your dog walks (I'm the one making this linkage to spirituality, I do realize you said what you get out of it is similar, not that you said it was spirituality).  Leaving aside the literal 'spirit' part of it, what are the spiritual benefits of both your and spiritual activities that to me could make them spiritual?  That it provides meaning?  That it provides a meta-scaffolding to one's understanding of reality?  That it connects the person with the rest of reality and allows the ascertainment and acceptance of their place in it?  Simple peaceful activity?

Maybe these examples I think are interesting in that they are so physical yet all provide opportunities for a spiritual aspect also.  Exercise, in addition to the enlightenment that can come from the actual physical effect on our thinking and mood, can also get one appreciating the amazing machines we inhabit/are, and how we are just one of many shapes of leaf at the end of an immense evolutionary tree.  Nature, in addition to just pure change of environment and opportunity to take one's mind off things, is so amazing and awe-inspiring all on its own in almost all of its detail, let alone rolling all that up into the massive connectivity between all of what we know of as science.  Oh, and it's undeniably real.  Doggos, still my top choice for species to inherit the earth after the demise of humans, are exemplars of so many otherwise spiritual fruits; few beings can provide empathy, patience, happiness, and the liberating focus on 'right now' as purely as them.  The addition of literal spirits to any of that seems so tiny and unnecessary and forced in a relative sense.