What would the world be without religion ?

[psychoslice]

I believe that it would be a far better world, we would be much more intelligent, and therefore we would be making more intelligent decisions. We would be respectful to each other, not because we are told to be by commandments, but simple because we all are on this planet together, and why not treat each other, just as we want to be treated ?.

I feel that to need a religion to keep us in check is to be nothing more than unintelligent, as if we are all stupid.

This is how most religions keep us, stupid, not thinking for ourselves, yes a world without religion will certainty make us much more intelligent.

So what do you think, are you addicted to your religion, can you live without your religion, and if you cannot why??.

 

[DawudTalut]

I believe that it would be a far better world, we would be much more intelligent, and therefore we would be making more intelligent decisions. We would be respectful to each other, not because we are told to be by commandments, but simple because we all are on this planet together, and why not treat each other, just as we want to be treated ?.

....

Was it gained in religion less soviet era?
One like to believe or not, true religious morals have some effect on legislature. Modern world have benefited it too.

 

[psychoslice]

Was it gained in religion less soviet era?
One like to believe or not, true religious morals have some effect on legislature. Modern world have benefited it too.

Sorry I don't quite understand what you are saying ?.

 

[YmirGF]

I believe that it would be a far better world, we would be much more intelligent, and therefore we would be making more intelligent decisions. We would be respectful to each other, not because we are told to be by commandments, but simple because we all are on this planet together, and why not treat each other, just as we want to be treated ?.

I feel that to need a religion to keep us in check is to be nothing more than unintelligent, as if we are all stupid.

This is how most religions keep us, stupid, not thinking for ourselves, yes a world without religion will certainty make us much more intelligent.

So what do you think, are you addicted to your religion, can you live without your religion, and if you cannot why??.

It's hard to say. If you consider a world where we never formulated religions that would be an interesting thought, however, if you are think of a world where all the religions were removed that would be quite another. I do agree that much of religion is predicated on the inherent stupidity of mankind. In stark contrast though, Paganism for all it's tom-foolery is in many ways more enlightened than the "respected" religions.

Sorry I don't quite understand what you are saying ?.

I'm pretty sure he is implying that "divine law" has given rise to good man-made laws. You know, that happy Sharia stuff...

 

[psychoslice]

It's hard to say. If you consider a world where we never formulated religions that would be an interesting thought, however, if you are think of a world where all the religions were removed that would be quite another. I do agree that much of religion is predicated on the inherent stupidity of mankind. In stark contrast though, Paganism for all it's tom-foolery is in many ways more enlightened than the "respected" religions.

Yes, and when you think of it, are we really that stupid that we need a religion ?, look how far we have come, and still religion is right up our arss.

 

[YmirGF]

Yes, and when you think of it, are we really that stupid that we need a religion ?, look how far we have come, and still religion is right up our arss.

Part of the problem is the huge emotional investment that some human animals have put into their religious outlook. They tend to think that if everyone else was just like them the world would magically be a better place without realizing that they would only end up with a world ossified by certainty.

 

[psychoslice]

Part of the problem is the huge emotional investment that some human animals have put into their religious outlook. They tend to think that if everyone else was just like them the world would magically be a better place without realizing that they would only end up with a world ossified by certainty.

Yes I realize that, and isn't that bloody sad, are we all that stupid, well of course that is true, we are.

 

[YmirGF]

Yes I realize that, and isn't that bloody sad, are we all that stupid, well of course that is true, we are.

People have been trained to put their faith into something outside of themselves instead of just having faith in their own being. The psychological underpinnings of this offloading process is what has given rise to so many problems we see today.

 

[psychoslice]

People have been trained to put their faith into something outside of themselves instead of just having faith in their own being. The psychological underpinnings of this offloading process is what has given rise to so many problems we see today.

Yes, you certainly do know what I am trying to say.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Of course it depends on how you define religion. Not every one sees religion from that perspective; therefore, while we call it is still a religion and we adhere to it, it would kind of fall through a loop hole in your OP. Trying to figure how to fix it.

..be would be much more intelligent, and therefore we would be making more intelligent decisions. We would be respectful to each other

If people didn't take advantage of their religion, then they (these specific people) will have that in their religion. It would be a part of their religion and it helps them see things just as respectfully and differently than how I see things and how Joe sees things.

It's abuse and control. It's the people not the religion.

...but simple because we all are on this planet together

Some Pagan religions and worldviews have this mindset specifically and that is how we live. Yet, we also have specific rituals and people we interact with that helps us see this without infringing on someone else's rights to believe what they want.

Of course, people can abuse this religious worldview and do their thing. That's not religion. That's, um, politics. (Couldn't figure which one matched. )

I feel that to need a religion to keep us in check is to be nothing more than unintelligent, as if we are all stupid.

Religion in and of itself doesn't keep one "in check." Specific religions have their tenants and doctrines that keep people in check; and, it doesn't define religion and how other people without those types of doctrines live their life with structure without the politics involved.

So what do you think, are you addicted to your religion, can you live without your religion, and if you cannot why??.

1. Yes, I am addicted to my religion. The Buddha's Law just is regardless of what we call it. Practicing is religion. Unless I abuse the laws of cause and affect (say go murder someone) and practice the opposite, then I am practicing and being religious. That's part of my religion. So, without it, I don't have to live by any societal laws. I wouldn't have morals. My values would be gone. Without religion/practice of one's morals and values via structure whether prayer or just eating as a family every Tuesday afternoon after work and school; it's religion.

Religion is about context not content.​

I guess I already answered the second part...now that I think of it, the third part too.

I wouldn't have appreciation for life if I don't have a need nor want to not only believe in the lessons life gives me but to practice it in my life as well. I would feel disconnected because I value family even if we are a part mentally.

I value where I live on this earth and taking care of it. I value life in and of itself.

I am grateful.

How can we live without being thankful?

That is religion. I can't see humanity as a peaceful world without it.

 

[psychoslice]

Of course it depends on how you define religion. Not every one sees religion from that perspective; therefore, while we call it is still a religion and we adhere to it, it would kind of fall through a loop hole in your OP. Trying to figure how to fix it.


If people didn't take advantage of their religion, then they (these specific people) will have that in their religion. It would be a part of their religion and it helps them see things just as respectfully and differently than how I see things and how Joe sees things.

It's abuse and control. It's the people not the religion.



Some Pagan religions and worldviews have this mindset specifically and that is how we live. Yet, we also have specific rituals and people we interact with that helps us see this without infringing on someone else's rights to believe what they want.

Of course, people can abuse this religious worldview and do their thing. That's not religion. That's, um, politics. (Couldn't figure which one matched. )



Religion in and of itself doesn't keep one "in check." Specific religions have their tenants and doctrines that keep people in check; and, it doesn't define religion and how other people without those types of doctrines live their life with structure without the politics involved.



1. Yes, I am addicted to my religion. The Buddha's Law just is regardless of what we call it. Practicing is religion. Unless I abuse the laws of cause and affect (say go murder someone) and practice the opposite, then I am practicing and being religious. That's part of my religion. So, without it, I don't have to live by any societal laws. I wouldn't have morals. My values would be gone. Without religion/practice of one's morals and values via structure whether prayer or just eating as a family every Tuesday afternoon after work and school; it's religion.

Religion is about context not content.​

I guess I already answered the second part...now that I think of it, the third part too.

I wouldn't have appreciation for life if I don't have a need nor want to not only believe in the lessons life gives me but to practice it in my life as well. I would feel disconnected because I value family even if we are a part mentally.

I value where I live on this earth and taking care of it. I value life in and of itself.

I am grateful.

How can we live without being thankful?

That is religion. I can't see humanity as a peaceful world without it.

Sorry I wont wast my time answering all you questions, there just ti silly for me to do so, I am sorry if that's not what you want to hear.

 

[Laika]

I largely agree with @Carlita that the problems of religion are problems of mankind itself and could simply take new forms in a world entirely without religion and that it depends on how far you take that process based on how you define religion. Not having religious belief or consciously rejecting it does not necessarily make you a better person and does not necessarily lead to a better society. It depends on how human beings use their beliefs even if those same beliefs determine the scope of what we believe is real and possible.

Even if I were to accept the premise of the OP that religion makes people stupid, being more intelligent does not necessarily make us kinder to each other. In fact, given that intellect tends to be more pessimistic because it can see the gulf between ideas and reality, without some underpinning belief in human progress of the goodness of mankind, it is just as easily a recipe for cynicism and cruelty.

Looking upon society as a Darwinian struggle for survival- by rejecting ethical principles that man has innate worth and rights as is derived from Christian morality- is not a recipe for human happiness, even if such a view were actually true and eliminated our illusions in the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. At the same time, even arguing that society is a survival of the fittest does not necessarily mean that we should accept that as a basis for moral behaviour because as social animals our capacity for compassion is something we can also value even in brute struggle for survival against nature. The scope for post-religious views is enourmous.

This is not to say that a world without religion wouldn't enjoy the benefits of being more rational or scientific, but again it depends on how these tools are used to change society and their consequences are not necessarily good in themselves.

Secularism has only been around since the 18th century and Atheism only really gained traction after Darwin in the 19th century. We don't know what sort of worlds are possible without religion but we should not necessarily project our fears onto the Unknown as superstitution. We should try to gain knowledge of who we are as human beings and on the basis we may have the power to create a world that serves our interests. The future is an undiscovered country waiting to be explored.

 

[psychoslice]

I largely agree with @Carlita that the problems of religion are problems of mankind itself and could simply take new forms in a world entirely without religion and that it depends on how far you take that process based on how you define religion. Not having religious belief or consciously rejecting it does not necessarily make you a better person and does not necessarily lead to a better society. It depends on how human beings use their beliefs even if those same beliefs determine the scope of what we believe is real and possible.

Even if I were to accept the premise of the OP that religion makes people stupid, being more intelligent does not necessarily make us kinder to each other. In fact, given that intellect tends to be more pessimistic because it can see the gulf between ideas and reality, without some underpinning belief in human progress of the goodness of mankind, it is just as easily a recipe for cynicism and cruelty.

Looking upon society as a Darwinian struggle for survival- by rejecting ethical principles that man has innate worth and rights as is derived from Christian morality- is not a recipe for human happiness, even if such a view were actually true and eliminated our illusions in the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. At the same time, even arguing that society is a survival of the fittest does not necessarily mean that we should accept that as a basis for moral behaviour because as social animals our capacity for compassion is something we can also value even in brute struggle for survival against nature. The scope for post-religious views is enourmous.

This is not to say that a world without religion wouldn't enjoy the benefits of being more rational or scientific, but again it depends on how these tools are used to change society and their consequences are not necessarily good in themselves.

Secularism has only been around since the 18th century and Atheism only really gained traction after Darwin in the 19th century. We don't know what sort of worlds are possible without religion but we should not necessarily project our fears onto the Unknown as superstitution. We should try to gain knowledge of who we are as human beings and on the basis we may have the power to create a world that serves our interests. The future is an undiscovered country waiting to be explored.

Yes and lets hope that so called secularism will grow, religion hasn't done that well, so I hope secularism will show the way, we certainly need more than religion for a better world.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Sorry I wont wast my time answering all you questions, there just ti silly for me to do so, I am sorry if that's not what you want to hear.

They are rhetorical questions to share my view and challenge that how you see religion isn't what the term means in and of itself. RF Mission statement, I guess you can say.

In your OP, you'd have to define what type of religious worldview you are talking about. Is it Christian? Then, yes, I agree with you. Just I don't put it or see it that harshly.

Is it Paganism? No, I disagree. I never will see any Pagan religions viewed in the OP light. Paganism has harsh histories but I don't see them indoctrinating people to where their indoctrinates get put off by the religion and put it down. Islam, yes. (sorry guys). Hinduism, yes (by family traditions and culture rather than-unless I'm wrong-means of control and power). I never saw it as negative but it does fall under how you define religion in context.

Put in another way, if you followed Catholicism, would you feel pushed to control others and feel you are limited in their teachings?​

If so, that is not their religion.

If not, that is religion.

If you are grateful for your life and you do things in your life because of this peacefulness and gratitude, why do you not call that religion?

I am being serious here. Is there a logical reason why religion is wrong or is it, in my opinion, based more on personal views rather than religion itself? (Using one worldview to define the whole world's definition of the word)​

 

[psychoslice]

They are rhetorical questions to share my view and challenge that how you see religion isn't what the term means in and of itself. RF Mission statement, I guess you can say.

In your OP, you'd have to define what type of religious worldview you are talking about. Is it Christian? Then, yes, I agree with you. Just I don't put it or see it that harshly.

Is it Paganism? No, I disagree. I never will see any Pagan religions viewed in the OP light. Paganism has harsh histories but I don't see them indoctrinating people to where their indoctrinates get put off by the religion and put it down. Islam, yes. (sorry guys). Hinduism, yes (by family traditions and culture rather than-unless I'm wrong-means of control and power). I never saw it as negative but it does fall under how you define religion in context.

Put in another way, if you followed Catholicism, would you feel pushed to control others and feel you are limited in their teachings?​

If so, that is not their religion.

If not, that is religion.

If you are grateful for your life and you do things in your life because of this peacefulness and gratitude, why do you not call that religion?

I am being serious here. Is there a logical reason why religion is wrong or is it, in my opinion, based more on personal views rather than religion itself? (Using one worldview to define the whole world's definition of the word)​

There is no such thing as religion, its all in your head, its your concept of what you yourself cannot understand, you then put all sorts on stories to that belief system, so as to have a belief in what you call God, do you see, the ignorance in that ?.

 

[Pudding]

I remember hearing some believer said that their religion keeps them from doing immoral actions...
So without their religion, those believer will become free to do whatever they like, they'll make the world a chaos.

With the presense of their religion in the world, at least there may have some good moral which can come from their religion to be follow by them though there may still have quite some immoral teachings by their religion, so the result is mix, but maybe better than a world without religion.

 

[psychoslice]

I remember hearing some believer said that their religion keeps them from doing immoral actions...
So without religion, those believer will become free to do whatever they like, they'll make the world a chaos.

With the presense of religion in the world, at least there're some good moral which can come from their religion to make the world livable though there stil have quite some immoral teachings in their religion's teaching, so the result is mix, but maybe better than a world without religion.

Na, are we that stupid, why do we need commandments from years ago to live in peace, cannot we realize that hurting each other is bad, do we really need some pretending god in the sky to makes us all do the right thing ?, of course not, treating each other with kindness is all we need to do, no need for silly commandments to tell us what we should do.,

 

[Pudding]

Na, are we that stupid, why do we need commandments from years ago to live in peace, cannot we realize that hurting each other is bad, do we really need some pretending god in the sky to makes us all do the right thing ?, of course not, treating each other with kindness is all we need to do, no need for silly commandments to tell us what we should do.,

Some religion can be view as a tool to control the ancient uneducated barbaric men, you don't know what those ancient men will do if without a God over their head to control their behaviour, barbaric God for barbaric men, an eye for an eye.

As we see, many religion in modern day have been improve and become more tender when compare to the ancient barbaric religion's moral, hopefully in the future the improve will continue to come.

 

[psychoslice]

Religion can be view as a tool to control the ancient uneducated barbaric men, you don't know what those ancient men will do if without a God over their head to control their behaviour, barbaric God for barbaric men, an eye for an eye.

As we see, many religion in modern day have been improve and become more tender when compare to the ancient barbaric religion's moral, hopefully in the future the improve will continue to come.

Well to me personally its all ignorance, I don't see religion being more intelligent than what it has for many years, its all down hill with religion, no matter what religion.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

There is no such thing as religion, its all in your head, its your concept of what you yourself cannot understand, you then put all sorts on stories to that belief system, so as to have a belief in what you call God, do you see, the ignorance in that ?.

I'm scratching my head. You mean you in general? As in people, right?

There is no such thing as my religion. Religion incorporates a lot of things that every human being does in order to survive. It becomes a religion when that action and belief (whatever it may be) becomes the foundation of all the things he does.

Whatever makes you-you personally-thankful to be alive is part of religion.

Whatever you do that lets yourself and others know you are grateful for being alive is part of religion.

You don't have to call it religion.

I don't know why religion has to be about god. That wasn't implied in the OP. If it was, I may not have replied since religion to half the rest of the world has no thing and concept of in it. While another part of the world population does not live a religion based on heirchy, politics, and things of that nature.

Broaden your definition to understand it through each individual person rather than lump every religious into one group and then say we are stupid (in one way or another) for following a religion that we should be without.

It's an insult; but, more the reason I replied was, I don't see the logic behind it other than personal bias and experience maybe? Nothing objective.