Religion makes you meaner

[Cyclone]

I can summarise for you if you didn't understand jimmy's post.

 

We are not in any way "wired" to believe in a single God. Polytheistic worship has been more common throughout human history than monotheistic.

 

I seriously doubt that "the idea has always been there". At some point we literally had no language or sense of self and I doubt that our first conscious thought was "I bet God made all this".

 

You seem to think that we're attacking your god or something and that you have to defend the idea. I agree that it's unlikely that the idea will ever go away completely. I mean, we still remember Odin and Zeus don't we, I doubt you can find many people that actually believe in them though, the same will happen to your god and all the other ones worshipped at the moment, and ones still to come.

 

---------- Post added 13-11-2015 at 09:42 ----------

 

What caused this ascension of knowledge across the whole human race, suddenly after 44,000 years?

 

It's pretty difficult to pin down, but there's a strong argument to be made for an extended interglacial period, then there's agriculture, domestication of animals, codified language, etc, etc...

 

---------- Post added 13-11-2015 at 09:45 ----------

 

Interesting graph here

 

http://cdn.phys.org/newman/csz/news/800/worldpopulat.gif

 

---------- Post added 13-11-2015 at 09:46 ----------

 

That's a very good point.

 

What caused this ascension of knowledge across the whole human race, suddenly after 44,000 years?

 

So, about 6k years ago...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age

 

The start of the bronze age.

 

I'd be fascinated to know if there are any better theories about what started it than what I already suggested (so I'm going to read the wiki now).

 

The Bronze Age in the ancient Near East began with the rise of Sumer in the 4th millennium BC. Cultures in the ancient Near East (often called, "the cradle of civilization") practiced intensive year-round agriculture, developed a writing system, invented the potter's wheel, created a centralized government, law codes, and empires, and introduced social stratification, slavery, and organized warfare.

No mention of the extended interglacial, but I'm sure I've read that this is what made it possible for agriculture to be discovered (and animal husbandry perhaps).

Edited November 13, 2015 by Cyclone

[RootsBooster]

I have no idea what your post is trying to say as it sounds more of a waffle on your part.

 

Given that historically nations have believed in a higher power (that was the main point and answer I was giving to RB's post).

 

From my own studies it does appear that nations before us (to this day I might add) have toyed with the idea of a higher being.

We were talking about the origins of religion, to which you responded about thinking we have always had religion, which is quite a bold claim. You seem to back-peddling somewhat now.

 

Whether you reject it outright or come to your own conclusions of why you think this higher being doesn't exist, it's still proof that we all have the ability to think and the idea of god has always been there.

 

You can carry on denying and asking question after question (as this is atheist western philosophy) but god isn't going away.

 

Many great thinkers have indirectly or directly spoken about god or higher beings- you probably can gather 50 quotes from google alone.

 

The idea of god is here to stay despite your dislike of it- and as for your last point, pretty silly in my opinion.

You can carry on denying other gods (as is the global theist way) but the belief in other gods that are nothing to do with yours isn't going away.

Religion has found its way in pretty much all corners of the world- you don't know who was sent where, neither do I.

You make it sound like a plague

Take Gautama Budda as an example, he never spoke about worshipping him or taking him as some diety- he was a path only. People go corrupt afterwards and take others as 'gods'.

 

You have the Greeks, who applied logic and rationality, even Socrates questioned as did Einstein.

 

Sometimes the evidence is out there and may be this is what life's intent is-search/ask and use the mind you have been given.

Sometimes people see something and jump to conclusions about it, calling it evidence for something that there is no evidence for (sometimes because they don't really understand what evidence is).

The very fact so many atheists have god on their mind is proof alone of it being ingrained in us...

I suppose vegetarians who have concerns about McDonalds on their minds have burgers ingrained in them?

A final add on, a friend who posted this short but thoughtful poem.

 

Thinkers, philosophers and people of wisdom,

From the ancient past till now,

Have understood that what made man different,

Was his reason and to question how;

 

However, with his ego unabated,

He left the realm of the mind,

To conclude the most irrational,

Subsequently, turning him blind;

 

The cosmos never evoked thinking,

And his inner self began to complain,

Why do you deny your Maker,

You deny reason, once again;

 

Obeying his whims and desires,

Forgetting the person he once was,

Pushing his soul into destruction,

Believing fairy tales, like The Wizard of Oz;

 

Enclosed, trapped and forgotten,

His heart began to decay,

He chose hate over love,

His life now in dismay.

 

Following the path of rejection,

The truth was covered and ignored,

His delusion of self-submission,

Created a barrier and closed the door;

 

The entrance to Divine love and mercy,

That was once open and a free,

Remained shut, clamped and secure,

As he forgot himself completely;

 

Is that a poem about your ongoing rejection, denial and ignorance of Vishnu and Ganesha, causing decay and hate in your heart?

 

EDIT* I've just had another read the whole way through that poem. I'm sorry but it really is terrible.

Edited November 13, 2015 by RootsBooster

[flamingjimmy]

Where have I equated one with the other?

Here: I quoted it unedited and in full.

 

A lot of religious people seem pretty screwed up to me; but a lot seem like really cool intelligent and deeply insightful people with kind benevolent natures. Conversely, a lot of raging anti-religous types, seem quite hateful.

 

If that's not equating screwed up religious people with raging anti religious types, then sue me.

 

---------- Post added 13-11-2015 at 13:43 ----------

 

I have no idea what your post is trying to say as it sounds more of a waffle on your part.

 

 

That you massively undermined your "we're all pre-wired to believe in one god" argument by mentioning polytheism, which historically absolutely dwarfs your little monotheism idea.

 

---------- Post added 13-11-2015 at 13:47 ----------

 

You're probably correct about that, most religions seem to have good basic principles until some start to believe their faith is the right one and start to inflict it on others, some even going to the extreme of being prepared to kill for it.

 

Historically that's hardly extreme, in fact it's pretty mainstream religious behaviour. It's only with the last few hundred years that that's died down and been left to the 'extremists' of religion.

Edited November 13, 2015 by flamingjimmy

[unbeliever]

Historically that's hardly extreme, pretty mainstream religious behaviour. It's only with the last few hundred years that that's died down and been left to the 'extremists' of religion.

 

I don't think that's really fair.

The Roman Catholic Church for example always had very strict rules about the manner in which Protestants, midwives and other heretics were to be burned alive in public.

Edited November 13, 2015 by unbeliever

[Waldo]

If that's not equating screwed up religious people with raging anti religious types, I don't know what is.

 

No, I didn't equate anti religious types; with religious nutters who like to kill people. You misrepresented what I said (and my meaning of 'pretty screwed up') to come out with...

 

Yeah they're like opposite sides of the same coin, in countrys with large atheist populations you hear about religious bloggers getting murdered by angry mobs of atheists all the time, just for daring to question them! because they're equally hateful.

 

It was you who introduced the murdering religious mob in to the argument; and then you try to claim to I'm equating the anti-religous with murderers. No, nice try, but I'm clearly not doing that.

 

I wasn't equating anything with anything else; just calling it how I see it.

[flamingjimmy]

No, I didn't equate anti religious types; with religious nutters who like to kill people. You misrepresented what I said (and my meaning of 'pretty screwed up') to come out with...

 

It was you who introduced the murdering religious mob in to the argument

 

That's only true if you don't consider that screwed up behaviour. I can see we're not going to agree here but I'd respond in exactly the same way if you made the same post again, with a hefty does of sarcasm highlighting that the excesses of the religious extremists in the world today are far worse than the excesses of atheists, because it certainly seemed to me (and still does no matter how many times I read it) that you most certainly were equating them, as if they were different sides of the same coin.

 

A lot of religious people seem pretty screwed up to me; but a lot seem like really cool intelligent and deeply insightful people with kind benevolent natures. Conversely, a lot of raging anti-religous types, seem quite hateful.

 

You excuse the screwed up religious people a little by highlighting the nice ones and then imply that the other side are just as bad. (if not worse in fact as they don't have your 'but I know loads of nice ones too' qualifier).

Edited November 13, 2015 by flamingjimmy

[Waldo]

You're probably correct about that, most religions seem to have good basic principles until some start to believe their faith is the right one and start to inflict it on others, some even going to the extreme of being prepared to kill for it.

 

I feel this is the main error of many religious people; they mistake the means for the ends (i.e. the manifestation of their particular religion to be the one expression of absolute truth), they take it literally and lack the presence of mind to understand it as metaphor. There's also a psychological snobbery involved; if you feel you're in position of a truth that escapes others; it makes you feel special etc. This is all screwed up behaviour.

 

Good religious practice; I think should make you a naturally more compassionate, accepting and understanding (of yourself, and other people) human being.

[flamingjimmy]

Good religious practice; I think should make you a naturally more compassionate, accepting and understanding (of yourself, and other people) human being.

 

Good religious practise is just as likely if not more to make someone mean, closed minded and judgemental (of themselves, and other people).

 

Acceptance and understanding, natural religious traits that come about from good religious practise? For real? Is that not a sick joke?

 

That's so counter to reality as to be absurd. Highly religious societies tend to be the least tolerant and accepting of other cultures, as well as new ideas.

Edited November 13, 2015 by flamingjimmy

[Waldo]

You excuse the screwed up religious people a little by highlighting the nice ones and then imply that the other side are just as bad. (if not worse in fact as they don't have your 'but I know loads of nice ones too' qualifier).

 

You'd have to put two people in front of me; in order for me to give a fair assessment and compare their relative scores on the screwed-up scale. Even then, you're only going to get my opinion; which is naturally tainted with my own life experience and prejudices.

 

All people, within all groups, are individuals; and complex ones at that.

 

Believe if or not; generally, I'm no fan of religion myself; though, in some cases I am (for example; when it's more of a tool to better understand our own natures).

 

---------- Post added 13-11-2015 at 14:28 ----------

 

Acceptance and understanding, natural religious traits that come about from good religious practise? For real? Is that not a sick joke?

 

That's so counter to reality as to be absurd. Highly religious societies tend to be the least tolerant and accepting of other cultures.

 

So, you're saying that's never the case, with *any* religious practice? Because you did seem to skip over the bit where I said...

 

I feel this is the main error of many religious people; they mistake the means for the ends (i.e. the manifestation of their particular religion to be the one expression of absolute truth), they take it literally and lack the presence of mind to understand it as metaphor. There's also a psychological snobbery involved; if you feel you're in position of a truth that escapes others; it makes you feel special etc. This is all screwed up behaviour.

Edited November 13, 2015 by Waldo

[Cyclone]

Buddhists aren't known for their judgemental nature. I wonder how children from buddhist households would score on the altruism scale.

Nor has anyone (to my knowledge) ever crusaded or killed in the name of converting people to Buddhism.