What is wrong with those people who believe in superstitions?

[The Kilted Heathen]

Superstitions I more view as "folk wisdom". Walking under a ladder is bad luck - you might get hit on the head with falling tools. Opening an umbrella inside is bad luck - you might break it or something. Breaking a mirror is bad luck - it's dangerous, and mirrors are expensive to replace. Some certainly have no such sense to them, such as black cats and horseshoes, and act more as charms and fetishes.

Religious faith, on the other hand, pertains to higher existence. While the fate of your soul might not rest on breaking no mirrors in your lifetime, to some it often does with which god you determine to follow; good or evil. The fate of ones crops or homestead could be at risk if proper tribute isn't paid to land spirits, or warded against those for whom there is no appeasing. Things that have no provable rationale, but are still ingrained within a cultural identity.

 

[McBell]

In all my years I've never seen produced a meaningful distinction between religious faith and superstition. In this, there isn't even much wiggle room for the usual doublespeak and language games used to distract from other 'hard' questions(problem of evil etc).

They are patently the same thing.

I disagree.
Religion is superstition that is not to be questioned.....

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

I disagree.
Religion is superstition that is not to be questioned.....

Talk about mixed messages!

Anyhow, I didn't say 'religion' I said 'religious faith', which of course is a greater category for all individual religious based faith beliefs.

 

[sovietchild]

I disagree.
Religion is superstition that is not to be questioned.....

If religion is superstition, then what are you doing on superstition forums?

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

If religion is superstition, then what are you doing on superstition forums?

Pointing out that you accusing people who believe differently from you of believing in superstitions is hypocrisy of the highest order.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

If religion is superstition, then what are you doing on superstition forums?

You're neutering what they said. They said religion is superstition that is not to be questioned.

 

[sovietchild]

You're neutering what they said. They said religion is superstition that is not to be questioned.

I guess I misunderstood. I still don't understand what that means.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Meaning that you can question a superstition. I can defiantly open an umbrella indoors, and have nothing happen. Often, you cannot question a religious conviction (if you are within that religion.) Even those outside the religion who question it get non-answers and vague reasoning.

 

[McBell]

Talk about mixed messages!

Anyhow, I didn't say 'religion' I said 'religious faith', which of course is a greater category for all individual religious based faith beliefs.

Still works out the same.
superstitions that are a part od a religion and or religious faith are superstitions that are not to be questioned.

It is the "not to be questioned" part that makes them different.

 

[McBell]

If religion is superstition, then what are you doing on superstition forums?

I was actually invited to this forum over a decade ago by a member who is still somewhat active.
I joined to see what it is about.
I have stayed for a multitude of reasons.

 

[McBell]

I guess I misunderstood. I still don't understand what that means.

It means that the only reason religion is not called superstition is because people believe the superstitions called religion to be real.

 

[sovietchild]

It means that the only reason religion is not called superstition is because people believe the superstitions called religion to be real.

So, you do think religion is superstition. Right?

 

[McBell]

So, you do think religion is superstition. Right?

I'll play your silly little game.
Yes.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Still works out the same.
superstitions that are a part od a religion and or religious faith are superstitions that are not to be questioned.

It is the "not to be questioned" part that makes them different.

But it doesn't. Not all religions forbid questioning of their own doctrine, in fact many encourage it.

Yet that is a moot point anyway, because once one has arrived at a belief he has, assumedly, already questioned the premises and found them to be convincing, else he would not believe them. A belief in djinn and a belief in fairies are epistemologically identical.

 

[sovietchild]

But it doesn't. Not all religions forbid questioning of their own doctrine, in fact many encourage it.

Yet that is a moot point anyway, because once one has arrived at a belief he has, assumedly, already questioned the premises and found them to be convincing, else he would not believe them. A belief in djinn and a belief in fairies are epistemologically identical.

What about ghosts?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

What about ghosts?

Ghosts, as in the disembodied spirit of a dead person? Purely.

 

[sovietchild]

Ghosts, as in the disembodied spirit of a dead person? Purely.

So, is a belief in ghosts and a belief in fairies epistemologically identical?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

So, is a belief in ghosts and a belief in fairies epistemologically identical?

Yes. Ghosts, fairies, leprechauns, Allah, Jesus, Russels teapot, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera...

All equally unevidenced propositions.

 

[sovietchild]

Yes. Ghosts, fairies, leprechauns, Allah, Jesus, Russels teapot, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera...

All equally unevidenced propositions.

Then, what is Satan?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Then, what is Satan?

To borrow an expression from @EtuMalku , he is who you are not.