World without Religion: Better or Worse? page 2

656 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by DarkBaron:
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:

i think that a real man can take its decisions.. that religions exist or not.

p.s and face the consequences…

no i meant that if you kill, the cops will kill you lol if ya know what i mean..

I’m dying to know. How, exactly, do you imply killing from this vague statement about decisions that religion exists, buddy?

Yea Buddy. the question of the topic was World without Religion: Better or Worse?
I thought it was clear from my statement that my answer is: Irrilevant. Since for example if you commit crimes, you will be punished according to laws.

There are invisible laws of nature, action-reaction. It’s all about indoctrination and free will.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:

There are invisible laws of nature, action-reaction. It’s all about indoctrination and free will.

How, exactly? The laws of physics have nothing to do with indoctrination, or free will.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:

There are invisible laws of nature, action-reaction. It’s all about indoctrination and free will.

How, exactly? The laws of physics have nothing to do with indoctrination, or free will.

laws of physics? lol do u actually read the posts before commenting? lol

A scorpion is a scorpion, it s its nature, carnivores eat meat, the same apply for humans not only animals. religion is irrilevant, if you don’t have nothing to eat or you are a samurai with a code of honour, religion is an illusion, the world wouldn t be better or worst, it would just be the world as it is now.

laws of physics… lol

 
Flag Post

World = Religiously influenced. (e.g. US laws, Crusades, Sunday off from work, saying grace)
World without religion = World = Religiously influenced.

World without religion = religiously influenced??

I think you should stop posting, personally. Unless you’re saying the world without humans would be the same with or without religion… in which case, you’re almost right – but then again, humans control the god damn planet.

 
Flag Post
World = Religiously influenced. (e.g. US laws, Crusades, Sunday off from work, saying grace)
World without religion = World = Religiously influenced.

@ above:

I’d say that there would still be religion in the world, except we would not call it religion. It may be called government, or rule, or monarchy, or a hobby. Words only give concepts a name. We may not have “religion” in its context, but it may appear itself somewhere else.

I did take Darkbaron’s lines out of context (I believe), but I don’t feel that the lack of religion is possible in a society. We may call it by another name, another concept or the like, but it is highly unlikely that human civilisations won’t stumble upon religion in some parallel world, or the concept of religion, as the civilisation develops. It may not be called “religion”, but we might call some aspects of certain cultures almost “religious” in nature. I, however, cannot prove this as I’m making an inference and not from researched or read information.

On the other hand, are we currently better off without religion? That’s definitely much harder to talk about.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:

There are invisible laws of nature, action-reaction. It’s all about indoctrination and free will.

How, exactly? The laws of physics have nothing to do with indoctrination, or free will.

laws of physics? lol do u actually read the posts before commenting? lol

Yes. You said the natural laws. That means the physical laws that govern our universe.

A scorpion is a scorpion, it s its nature, carnivores eat meat, the same apply for humans not only animals. religion is irrilevant, if you don’t have nothing to eat or you are a samurai with a code of honour, religion is an illusion, the world wouldn t be better or worst, it would just be the world as it is now.

laws of physics… lol

With regards to scorpions, you are referring to its embodiment, and its instincts, I believe. A scorpion’s body-shape and size bias it towards certain activities, and dietary needs. It has no conscious mind to break with instinct, so these tendencies govern it.

Humans are very different, as they have the neurological condition of self; the ability to choose to defy instinctual behaviors. Some eat meat and nothing but meat. Some eat both meat and plant matter. Some eat only plant matter. It is possible in theory to even survive without eating, so long as you gain the right nutrient intake some other way. So long as you obey the physical laws, you can thrive any number of ways, which are entirely your choice.

Religion is not an illusion, but a particular emergent property of several aspects of that ‘self’ within the brain, and a natural extension of our storytelling ability combined with drive and imagination. All of these are formed through connections in the brain, which themselves obey natural laws.


Originally posted by Laxaria:

I’d say that there would still be religion in the world, except we would not call it religion. It may be called government, or rule, or monarchy, or a hobby. Words only give concepts a name. We may not have “religion” in its context, but it may appear itself somewhere else.

I did address this once before. The only way to permanently be rid of religion, is to destroy the structures and abilities in the human brain that give rise to it. That way it can never come back. We remove curiosity, the ability to tell stories, imagination, and the ability to think in a group. Abstract thought also goes.

With these gone, the building blocks for religion are torn down, and we can guarantee religion will not crop up again in any form. If any one of them stays, we still have a danger of religions of one type or another, forming.

So, would we be better off without these mental structures?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:

There are invisible laws of nature, action-reaction. It’s all about indoctrination and free will.

How, exactly? The laws of physics have nothing to do with indoctrination, or free will.

laws of physics? lol do u actually read the posts before commenting? lol

Yes. You said the natural laws. That means the physical laws that govern our universe.

A scorpion is a scorpion, it s its nature, carnivores eat meat, the same apply for humans not only animals. religion is irrilevant, if you don’t have nothing to eat or you are a samurai with a code of honour, religion is an illusion, the world wouldn t be better or worst, it would just be the world as it is now.

laws of physics… lol

With regards to scorpions, you are referring to its embodiment, and its instincts, I believe. A scorpion’s body-shape and size bias it towards certain activities, and dietary needs. It has no conscious mind to break with instinct, so these tendencies govern it.

Humans are very different, as they have the neurological condition of self; the ability to choose to defy instinctual behaviors. Some eat meat and nothing but meat. Some eat both meat and plant matter. Some eat only plant matter. It is possible in theory to even survive without eating, so long as you gain the right nutrient intake some other way. So long as you obey the physical laws, you can thrive any number of ways, which are entirely your choice.

Religion is not an illusion, but a particular emergent property of several aspects of that ‘self’ within the brain, and a natural extension of our storytelling ability combined with drive and imagination. All of these are formed through connections in the brain, which themselves obey natural laws.

There is a damn comma between natural laws and action reaction can t you see it?

Only few humans have the talent to overcome their insticts, hence why i cited the samurai code, the others will put always food over everything.. religion included.

Storytelling, connections in brain obey natural laws? lol Brain doesn’t work that way, no1 knows the secret of the brain.. wthell are you writing? lol oh and some religion doesn t even have the concept of ego.. so u have a bad idea of what religion means.

Religion is an illusion, beacouse you have food in your stomach and not dying for starvation..

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by DarkBaron:

World = Religiously influenced. (e.g. US laws, Crusades, Sunday off from work, saying grace)
World without religion = World = Religiously influenced.

World without religion = religiously influenced??

I think you should stop posting, personally. Unless you’re saying the world without humans would be the same with or without religion… in which case, you’re almost right – but then again, humans control the god damn planet.

i still think that World without Religion isn’t Better or Worse. Religion is just an illusion, irrilevant.
Sure humanity has been influenced by various religions, i think religious fanatics play the real role..
In our era any normal people if it s not forced by a fanatic, can choose to ignore religion.

So if the question was World without Religious fanatics: Better or Worse? i would say BETTER.

 
Flag Post

I feel like, whatever your thoughts maybe on the validity of religion, religion gives people a reason to beleive when there is none other. Sure religions across the globe have done some pretty terrible things, and no doubt plenty are doing the wrong things right now, but there are plenty of people who are doing the right thing right now because of religion.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Zombie_Ravioli:

I feel like, whatever your thoughts maybe on the validity of religion, religion gives people a reason to beleive when there is none other. Sure religions across the globe have done some pretty terrible things, and no doubt plenty are doing the wrong things right now, but there are plenty of people who are doing the right thing right now because of religion.

maybe i am too simplicistic but you think people don t kill coz they go to hell, or they don t kill coz they will be killed as a consequence?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:
Originally posted by Zombie_Ravioli:

I feel like, whatever your thoughts maybe on the validity of religion, religion gives people a reason to beleive when there is none other. Sure religions across the globe have done some pretty terrible things, and no doubt plenty are doing the wrong things right now, but there are plenty of people who are doing the right thing right now because of religion.

maybe i am too simplicistic but you think people don t kill coz they go to hell, or they don t kill coz they will be killed as a consequence?

I would certainly hope they don’t kill for a number of reasons. I feel like people might give more money to the poor, or hungry because of religion.
On a side note, a study done that was mentioned in the book Freakonomics by Leavitt people are more likely to die in inner city Chicago then on Death Row.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:

There is a damn comma between natural laws and action reaction can t you see it?

Which does not change the meaning of the sentence.

Only few humans have the talent to overcome their insticts, hence why i cited the samurai code, the others will put always food over everything.. religion included.

Er, no. You are overcoming instincts right now, by the very virtue of your sense of self being active. That is it’s purpose after all.

Storytelling, connections in brain obey natural laws? lol Brain doesn’t work that way, no1 knows the secret of the brain..

Except for neurologists, neuroscientists, neuroengineers, and of course anyone who works with neuroprosthetics.

I do happen to have neurological training, Grinder. We don’t know everything, but what we do understand the function of, we interface hardware with or engage with fMRI, EEG, or ECoG. Guess what? We can predict exactly what occurs.

Psychology, the study of behavior is also entirely dependent on understanding the function of the brain, and specifically how it will react in given circumstances – how different parts of the self play off against one another, and neurology backs that up.

So whilst we don’t know everything, we know a great amount. It is only you here, who is clueless as to how the brain functions. I can help to educate you, if you’re willing, but you will have to do a fair bit of yourself – start to unlock the secrets of the brain, we have already mastered.

- and wthell are you writing? lol oh and some religion doesn t even have the concept of ego.. so u have a bad idea of what religion means.

Nope. Explaining from a neurology perspective, how religion actually works – how it is an emergent property from the way our brains function.

Religion is an illusion, because you have food in your stomach and not dying for starvation..

Only in the same way that your sense of self is an illusion. In other words, it exists, but not in a single, cohesive piece, but a scattering of a thousand myriad associations and interconnections.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:
Originally posted by Zombie_Ravioli:

I feel like, whatever your thoughts maybe on the validity of religion, religion gives people a reason to beleive when there is none other. Sure religions across the globe have done some pretty terrible things, and no doubt plenty are doing the wrong things right now, but there are plenty of people who are doing the right thing right now because of religion.

maybe i am too simplicistic but you think people don t kill coz they go to hell, or they don t kill coz they will be killed as a consequence?

I think you’re making it too simple (not just on that issue, I might add). There is a number of reasons why people don’t kill each other and religious teachings are probably among the least influential ones. Otherwise we atheists would go in rampages all the time…

 
Flag Post

Otherwise we atheists would go in rampages all the time…

You mean you don’t!?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

Otherwise we atheists would go in rampages all the time…

You mean you don’t!?

No. I just eat babies. I think I said that before. Why would I kill things I wouldn’t eat afterwards. That’s just boring.

 
Flag Post

(vikaTae)

So, would we be better off without these mental structures?

Nope, I don’t think so. Not all “religions” are bad, if we were to include the almost religious view some cultures and societies take to their actions and understandings of the world.

I wouldn’t think that a world that would be without religion would be better than what we have now, given vikaTae’s establishment of the associated aspects of the human brain that is responsible for the development of religion.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by TheKnifeGrinder:

There is a damn comma between natural laws and action reaction can t you see it?

Which does not change the meaning of the sentence.

Only few humans have the talent to overcome their insticts, hence why i cited the samurai code, the others will put always food over everything.. religion included.

Er, no. You are overcoming instincts right now, by the very virtue of your sense of self being active. That is it’s purpose after all.

Storytelling, connections in brain obey natural laws? lol Brain doesn’t work that way, no1 knows the secret of the brain..

Except for neurologists, neuroscientists, neuroengineers, and of course anyone who works with neuroprosthetics.

I do happen to have neurological training, Grinder. We don’t know everything, but what we do understand the function of, we interface hardware with or engage with fMRI, EEG, or ECoG. Guess what? We can predict exactly what occurs.

Psychology, the study of behavior is also entirely dependent on understanding the function of the brain, and specifically how it will react in given circumstances – how different parts of the self play off against one another, and neurology backs that up.

So whilst we don’t know everything, we know a great amount. It is only you here, who is clueless as to how the brain functions. I can help to educate you, if you’re willing, but you will have to do a fair bit of yourself – start to unlock the secrets of the brain, we have already mastered.

- and wthell are you writing? lol oh and some religion doesn t even have the concept of ego.. so u have a bad idea of what religion means.

Nope. Explaining from a neurology perspective, how religion actually works – how it is an emergent property from the way our brains function.

Religion is an illusion, because you have food in your stomach and not dying for starvation..

Only in the same way that your sense of self is an illusion. In other words, it exists, but not in a single, cohesive piece, but a scattering of a thousand myriad associations and interconnections.

no. i don t need to be educated by none. And especially not on how the brain works. i am not clueless.. the way you talk makes me think you are too self confident. no offence but you just seems an arrogant and nothing much else.

i m done with this thread and probaly the entire forums except some sections.

 
Flag Post

Calling people something works a lot better if you can show why you do that. No offense, but I see not a single bit of arrogance in Vika’s post. She’s just trying to explain stuff.

 
Flag Post

Thank you for your defense, EPR. It is most appreciated :)

But yes, no arrogance was meant, Grinder. My offer is genuine. I have studied the peripheral, and more recently central nervous system for some time, I’m happy to help guide a learning process to help you understand how much we do understand about the brain, and the parts we can control and can predict with accuracy. But, it would require a willingness to work on your part, as opposed to sitting back and being told.

I have neither the desire, nor the time to write out the past eighty-five years’ worth of work in human psychology, or the past 20 years in neurology. Especially when I suspect without a willingness to learn on your own time, you will just dismiss such efforts out of hand as you have done here.

If you have no desire to learn, that too is fine, but please don’t make falicious claims that ‘nobody understands the brain’, then throw a hissy fit when you are picked up and corrected on that. We don’t understand everything, but we understand one whole heck of a lot, and I am happy to point that out, each time someone tries to convince us that it is somehow a great unknown.

 
Flag Post

Although I myself, am not religious, I think the world would’ve been much worse without relgion.

Religion helped lay down several codes of law and helped shape culture and civilization. The original ideas of religion were crucial in early human times (nobody ever heard of the great atheist empire).

That said, in modern times, I feel it’s starting to become more outdated.

 
Flag Post

The thing about great empires is that they spent most of their resources killing other empires and building religious monuments. Many of the monuments are still there, and people write about invading empires.

It doesn’t mean society couldn’t develop without religion, it would mean people would spend significantly fewer resources on armies, ziggurats, walls, pyramids, Easter Island heads, etc.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Winnabago:

The thing about great empires is that they spent most of their resources killing other empires and building religious monuments. Many of the monuments are still there, and people write about invading empires.

It doesn’t mean society couldn’t develop without religion, it would mean people would spend significantly fewer resources on armies, ziggurats, walls, pyramids, Easter Island heads, etc.

Perhaps, but I think that it was a way for societies to develop cultures. Note that in your argument they were fighting other organized groups that also had religions. Regardless of whether or not war ensued between or because of their religions, there still was the creation of organization that allowed them to band together.

 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

She’s answering because ‘’you are arrogant lol’’ is baseless?

I’m going to take it that you’re out of arguments, rather.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by TheLoneLucas:

She’s answering because ‘’you are arrogant lol’’ is baseless?

I’m going to take it that you’re out of arguments, rather.

?