-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
If Religions are Entirely Bogus, Why are so Many Good People Religious?
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Because!!!
There are people of all types taken in by all sorts of crazy ideas
There is also the comradeship.
Peer pressure.
Childhood indoctrination.
There are people of all types taken in by all sorts of crazy ideas
There is also the comradeship.
Peer pressure.
Childhood indoctrination.
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
Coincidence? Lots of people are (generally) good and lots of people are (nominally) religious so there is inevitable crossover. Correlation doesn’t necessarily mean connection. Why do so many good people drive red cars?
Perception? Good people who happen to be religious are often presented (by themselves or others) as specifically Good Religious People. Good people who happen not to be religious are rarely presented as being Good Non-Religious People. Sometimes good non-religious people are still perceived as being bad (or at least not as good) simply because they’re not religious.
Good intentions? Even if religion is “bogus” (whatever that actually means), it can still have positive aspects, concepts and structures that good people would be naturally attracted to regardless of their actual beliefs.
Social default? Historically, and still to an extent today in some places, being at least seen as following a religion (particularly the “right” religion) has often been deemed socially (and sometimes legally) required, expected or a presumed default. Good people are probably less likely to push back against that kind of social convention too, even if it is flawed.
Perception? Good people who happen to be religious are often presented (by themselves or others) as specifically Good Religious People. Good people who happen not to be religious are rarely presented as being Good Non-Religious People. Sometimes good non-religious people are still perceived as being bad (or at least not as good) simply because they’re not religious.
Good intentions? Even if religion is “bogus” (whatever that actually means), it can still have positive aspects, concepts and structures that good people would be naturally attracted to regardless of their actual beliefs.
Social default? Historically, and still to an extent today in some places, being at least seen as following a religion (particularly the “right” religion) has often been deemed socially (and sometimes legally) required, expected or a presumed default. Good people are probably less likely to push back against that kind of social convention too, even if it is flawed.
There are as many, if not more, very bad religious people in this world.
Lots of good kids believe in Santa...
Cooky
Veteran Member
Religion is boring. Let's talk about politics again.
RCC paedophile priests and those of other denominations who violate children. The sick 'you must be 'saved' or burn in hell' mob who threaten people in a very abusive way to try to make them convert. Those who try to 'cure' gays, there is nothing good about them. That will do for starters, but the list goes on and on.
No, I'm afraid it won't. You made a matter-of-fact statement saying that at least 50% of religious people are "very bad."
Now post some evidence to support the claim or retract/revise the statement.
Phaedrus
Active Member
For starters, I would not be attributing goodness to religiosity.
Cooky
Veteran Member
Religion represents many concepts. But you're right, "goodness" is not necessarily the primary one (though it is for some), although it is one of the originals.
Zoroaster: "Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds".
Good people come from all walks of life, all beliefs. I don't see goodness connected to religion. There's other stuff going on, like having role models, an intellect to see co-operation is of mutual benefit, genetic factors, and more.
Cooky
Veteran Member
Bad people could be drawn to religion as a source for help.
In Catholicism, we view the church as similar to a hospital for us sinners.
Alternately, without religion at all, bad people would have no reason to strive to be kind toward others. Just like if there were no police, I might just be a bank robber.
Oooh, I can be nice for once!
Because religions often make eminent sense rather than not (to many), and good people are probably so with or without religion?
I wouldn't say that religions are entirely bogus. Some people might become religious "just in case," kind of like Pascal's wager.
Erebus
Well-Known Member
Short answer: Rational and good are not synonymous.
Long answer: Rationality and morality have an odd relationship to one another since what is or isn't rational heavily depends on context, intent and personal values. For example, you might take the view that the best approach to life would be to increase one's own comfort, wealth and pleasure. If so, then the rational course of action in any given situation would be to do whatever benefits you the most, weighing up risk and reward as you go. If that means you cause somebody harm, then so be it. If it would be more beneficial to ingratiate yourself to somebody, then that's what you'd do. It's certainly possible to take such a view and be a law-abiding citizen (risk may well outweigh reward when it comes to breaking the law) but it's also very likely you would betray, manipulate and leech off others for your own gain.
So if being rational does't necessarily make one a good person then being irrational may not necessarily make one a bad person. Take the standard of rationality presented above. An irrational action would then be something that isn't intended to increase one's own comfort, wealth and pleasure. That could involve self-sacrifice for the benefit of others or it could involve engaging in suicidally reckless behaviour.
There are of course other models for rational behaviour than the one I described. Working towards collective good is one example that could well be more common than the selfish model. That does carry its own pitfalls though as the collective good may necessitate harm to particular individuals/groups. Hopefully though this should demonstrate that rationality does not inherently suggest moral behaviour and irrationality does not inherently suggest immoral behaviour (or vice versa). If we take religion to be entirely irrational, that in no way guarantees that religious people would be immoral.
Finally I just wanted to note that I don't believe religion is entirely irrational or that any person is entirely rational. I've seen people work on the assumption that rationality is always good and irrationality is always bad and wanted to take the time to write down my thoughts on that assumption.
I have actually met more bad so called 'Christians' than good ones in my life.
Because being good doesn't require a person to be completely rational?
Also, the irrational stuff is generally in the theology. I've been amazed how irrelevant a religion's theology is to most of its adherents most of the time. IMO, for many religious people, the answer to the question "what's the significance of this ritual?" is actually something like "not doing it would cause major friction in my family," which can be completely rational in its own way.
But I do think that many people just have a desire to do good and a desire to be part of a community, and it just happens that the community that they get inserted into by family or society happens to be religiously-based.
The motorsport community is the same way: there's nothing that inherently links driving around in circles really fast to charity - just as there's not really anything that inherently links religious observance to charity - but lots of people do charitable acts through and involving their auto racing.
You are not alone
BSM1
What? Me worry?
Because many have been told that it's raining outside and they have accepted this without even looking out of the window, IMHO, of course.
Critical analysis and logical reasoning are new things. We're not neurologically wired for it. It's a learned skill foreign to our species.
For most of hominin history, thinking things through had a negative survival value. Gut reactions and jumping to conclusions were the safest bets.
For most of hominin history, thinking things through had a negative survival value. Gut reactions and jumping to conclusions were the safest bets.