A Question for Atheist.

[Deathbydefault]

Do you think the world would be better off without religion?

The world would be better off without theism.
There are plenty of religions that mainly focus on living a spiritually satisfying life, and are mostly harmless.

 

[Thumper]

It should acknowledge its own core roles as social aggregator, creator of common language and communicator of values, while healing itself of the entirely exagerated roles of scripture and deity that so plague and threaten so much of it currently.

Oh, and it should learn to stop containing its own potential and become the harbinger of a wider society that it could so easily become.

I don't see that.

It's a social divider creating in-group vs. out-group thinking. This causes the conflict between religions, be it the Christian/Muslim "Crusades" which have raged over 900 years (since 1091), or the Protestant/Catholic animosity, or the Irish/Protestant conflicts, or countless other "out group is evil" thinking.

And "values" are questionable at best. Let's see, religion has argued for slavery, against women's suffrage, against birth control, for female castration, etc. Nope, I would argue that humanity can come up with much better ethical values without religion.

 

[Thumper]

I suspect religion was created to keep the masses in check. Without religion most folks may just run amok. Maybe we'd have to mature beyond the need for religion first.

“Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet. Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.” ~ Napoleon Bonaparte

 

[Curious George]

Eventually it could. If you mean better off if religion never was...that is hard to say. If religion just disappeared tomorrow man would just replace it with something else.

 

[viole]

Do you think the world would be better off without religion?

Yes. But only because I believe that you can get rid of religion, in general, only when social security is in place. For every one.

Ergo, when the world will voluntarily reject metaphysical claims and the hope of a better life in the hereafter, then we will have already reached the pre-conditions for a better world.

Until that point is reached, I would have a moral dilemma to debate with people whose only hope is to have a better life after they die.

Ciao

- viole

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't see that.

It's a social divider creating in-group vs. out-group thinking. This causes the conflict between religions, be it the Christian/Muslim "Crusades" which have raged over 900 years (since 1091), or the Protestant/Catholic animosity, or the Irish/Protestant conflicts, or countless other "out group is evil" thinking.

Indeed, that is a serious problem. One that I personally see as a disease ravaging religion, to the point that Islaam for one is not a functional religion despite its self-image.

And "values" are questionable at best. Let's see, religion has argued for slavery, against women's suffrage, against birth control, for female castration, etc. Nope, I would argue that humanity can come up with much better ethical values without religion.

That is arguable, but then so is that the anthropological makeup of humanity demands something a lot like religion.

 

[gnomon]

Do you think the world would be better off without religion?

What is your definition of religion and by what means without it would be "better"?

Establish an argument.

Don't give a damn about the bull**** offered up so far....

.

 

[psychoslice]

I think the world would be better without religion but we are sadly not ready to do that , we are still too immature to change, we cannot yet take responsibility for ourselves, but hopefully soon we will.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

What is your definition of religion and by what means without it would be "better"?

Establish an argument.

Don't give a damn about the bull**** offered up so far....

.

Right. . . .

 

[Altfish]

"Do you think the world would be better off without religion?"

I'm not sure, on an individual level I'm fairly certain it gives many people a lot of comfort. So it is a benefit.

BUT when religion start to try to influence how others should behave, how they should think, it becomes a significant problem.

 

[psychoslice]

Well anyone with half a brain would know that religion has never worked, need I say more ??.

 

[Augustus]

It's a social divider creating in-group vs. out-group thinking.

It's also a social uniter though and in-group v out-group thinking is an unavoidable part of the human condition.

religion has argued for slavery,

True, but was also the major force behind the abolitionist movement and the US civil rights movement.

I would argue that humanity can come up with much better ethical values without religion.

True, but they can also come up with much worse. The 20th C shows what can happen when humans believe they can create a new morality.

The world would be better without religion arguments are excessively idealistic imo. It is possible people could create better social systems and it is possible they could create worse.

What is certain is that people will never unite around a single 'best' way of living and the world will always be value pluralistic. And while tradition can prevent positive changes it can also prevent negative changes and drive positive changes.

The 'problems of religion' are really the problems of the human condition. Whatever ideologies arose to replace religion would be equally arbitrary and mythological. We will continue to be an irrational species regardless of whatever ideologies are in vogue. The idea of a singular Humanity that unites us all is an example of this; there will always be in and out groups, prejudice, xenophobia and bigotry. Around 93% of wars have not been religious in nature, so its disappearance would do little to improve the prospects for a peaceful world.

If religions were to disappear, there is a possibility that things could get better, but the upside is severely limited by our flawed nature. There is also a possibility that things could get worse, and the downside is certainly not limited by our flawed nature.

Sometimes it is better the devil you know.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

No religion might mean that people would turn to one another, instead, for the answers to the tough questions. Not that they don't already, but the answer, many times, tends to be to look to religion for the answers. Or "I do this..." in some religious context.

I've always felt that humans might have a much greater capacity for successful interaction with one another if our humanity (and all the good, bad and ugly that comes with it) was admitted as one of the only things we truly have to be shared.

 

[Thumper]

Yes keeping up with the changing society and culture would be a good thing, but not many have done that, they are still reading scripture that belongs in the past and trying to apply it in our world today, especially the Muslim faith.

Well, first off, I'm not sure it is entirely fair to single out the Muslims. You might be right at this point in time, but 1,000 years ago, the Middle-East was the center of knowledge and learning. Algebra, our Arabic numbers, most star names, etc. all come from this period. Even if you just look at pictures of the Mid-East from the '60s, you see mini-skirts and a vibrant up-beat society.

It used to be that if you wanted to work the the brightest people, you went to Baghdad. During my lifetime, the "Mecca" of human knowledge and learning has primarily been the U.S., but that has changed over the past couple of decades.

We might be seeing a "history repeats itself" situation with the U.S. right now as the Christian fear of becoming marginalized intensifies. We are still fighting to keep creationism out of our science classes, yet we are the country that sent a man to the Moon.

I think a huge part of the problem is fear of the future. A lot of people are intimidated by all the technological advances and they fear being left behind. This makes the future seem bleak.

Do people see Big Brother or The United Federation of Planets in humanity's future?

 

[psychoslice]

Well, first off, I'm not sure it is entirely fair to single out the Muslims. You might be right at this point in time, but 1,000 years ago, the Middle-East was the center of knowledge and learning. Algebra, our Arabic numbers, most star names, etc. all come from this period. Even if you just look at pictures of the Mid-East from the '60s, you see mini-skirts and a vibrant up-beat society.

It used to be that if you wanted to work the the brightest people, you went to Baghdad. During my lifetime, the "Mecca" of human knowledge and learning has primarily been the U.S., but that has changed over the past couple of decades.

We might be seeing a "history repeats itself" situation with the U.S. right now as the Christian fear of becoming marginalized intensifies. We are still fighting to keep creationism out of our science classes, yet we are the country that sent a man to the Moon.

I think a huge part of the problem is fear of the future. A lot of people are intimidated by all the technological advances and they fear being left behind. This makes the future seem bleak.

Do people see Big Brother or The United Federation of Planets in humanity's future?

Yes that was interesting, I do think that Islam came from a warmongering belief system as also the old testament teaching, and the future, I don't really know where its heading, hopefully we all will wake up one day and realize how stupid we all have been.

 

[Augustus]

I've always felt that humans might have a much greater capacity for successful interaction with one another if our humanity (and all the good, bad and ugly that comes with it) was admitted as one of the only things we truly have to be shared.

That we have a 'shared humanity' is a very religious concept, particularly a monotheistic one due to creation mythology.

No other animal has such a concept after all.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Overall, no. Because I don't think religion is the source of the problems often associated with it. Just a symptom.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

That we have a 'shared humanity' is a very religious concept, particularly a monotheistic one due to creation mythology.

No other animal has such a concept after all.

But does that distinction necessitate any "supernatural" cause or power be behind those "extra" mental abilities that humans have? The cheetah is "faster" than most other animals. Does that great speed have to have a supernatural source? Why does the human "special attribute" of increased intelligential and emotional processing get such a fantastical treatment in human lore? Should we consider that perhaps the source of that lore is fairly biased to believe it is special in some way?

 

[Augustus]

But does that distinction necessitate any "supernatural" cause or power be behind those "extra" mental abilities that humans have? The cheetah is "faster" than most other animals. Does that great speed have to have a supernatural source? Why does the human "special attribute" of increased intelligential and emotional processing get such a fantastical treatment in human lore? Should we consider that perhaps the source of that lore is fairly biased to believe it is special in some way?

Humans certainly do seem to believe they are special, and we are special in that, uniquely among animals, we cannot be happy without telling ourselves comforting myths be they religious or secular in nature, the myths of Reason and a shared Humanity being cases in point.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Humans certainly do seem to believe they are special, and we are special in that, uniquely among animals, we cannot be happy without telling ourselves comforting myths be they religious or secular in nature, the myths of Reason and a shared Humanity being cases in point.

But we do share humanity. Even if only because we are all human. The same as any species shares its existence with others of its species. Perhaps some are territorial, some are intrinsically woven into distinct groupings, some are loners. Time and time again humans have proven that they are a community-driven animal. We desire contact with others - we do best when we work together. Perhaps there are myths - but there are facts to support the idea that we, as a species, desire to share our experiences with one another. You can't ignore it all as "myth". To do so would also be irrational, and attempt to support simply another version of "mythology".