-
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!
Ask An Irreligious Person
- Thread starter Meow Mix
- Start date
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
What is your favorite flavor of ice cream!?
I'm not a huge fan of ice cream, but there are some certain times that it's indispensable... and then it's chocolate chip cookie dough
Because I was put here for your pleasure and amusement, and I think you can use your imagination
I'd say it's a side effect of being social creatures. A certain experiment from the 1950's might interest you. The Illusion of Asymmetric Insight « You Are Not So Smart
The main part I'll highlight below
Right away, social hierarchies began to emerge in which the boys established leaders and followers and special roles for everyone in between. Norms spontaneously generated. For instance, when one boy hurt his foot but didnt tell anyone until bedtime, it became expected among the group that Rattlers didnt complain. From then on members waited until the days work was finished to reveal injuries. When a boy cried, the others ignored him until he got over it. Regulations and rituals sprouted just as quickly. For instance, the high-status members, the natural leaders, in both groups came up with guidelines for saying grace during meals and correct rotations for the ritual.
I think it's a difficult question that people can only speculate on, really. Epistemically, we have every reason to believe that all humans start out in neutral non-religious positions -- assuming that we're using the word "religious" to refer to specific beliefs about the universe. There does seem to be a certain amount of awe and wonder with the universe and the things around us inherent in most people; but I hesitate to call these feelings properly "religious."
I can speculate that this human inquisitiveness and proneness to be struck in awe by the world around us could give rise to religious thought (and indeed, if I had to guess where religions came from these human traits seem the most likely culprit); but I don't think it necessarily gives rise to religious thought.
This is further compounded by the fact that children are mind-sponges that absorb a great deal of what they learn from their elders; and for good reason: it would be a little difficult for the species to survive if children didn't obey the worldly knowledge and experience of their elders even without understanding it, at least during their youth.
The universe is also wonderfully complex: it's simple, even elegant, but complex enough so as to require a lot of work and counterintuitive thought to begin to understand.
Add these things up -- humans' awe at the universe, humans' instinct to believe what they're told, and the universe's insistence on being fairly mysterious -- and it seems to me probable that these are the ingredients from which religious thought sprang.
In short, it seems to me that at some point religion became popular (though it could have been otherwise), and so children began being instructed in religious thought. Before they receive said instruction, they seem to be religiously neutral.
Sorry for all the blather to get there, but my answer to your question is that I feel as though I've reverted to non-religion. It seems to me that we all start out that way until religion is taught to us.
Yes, actually; but there's nothing to bake and we don't have any bingo cards.
I don't understand how anyone can be non-religious. The word "religious" and "religion" can mean too many things, and I think the only types of people who might genuinely fail to meet all of the possible definitions would be the human vegetables. No offense intended, I just really don't understand. >_<
I'm going off of this definition from Merriam-Webster:
I'm not saying that this is the *only* definition, but (1), (2), and (4) are generally what are referred to being absent when people describe themselves as "irreligious." People can lack those things without being vegetables.
Songbird
She rules her life like a bird in flight
Because I was put here for your pleasure and amusement, and I think you can use your imagination
My imagination shall incorporate your cupcake, my ladythugster.
Bob Dixon
>implying
Wow, I think my ego's full. Why do I feel like taking a warm bath now?!
Your ego is a bit too full.
Take the bath, the excess ego will dissolve in the warm water. Bubbles will help.
Make sure to drain the ego-water and take another bath. Sitting in hypertonic ego-solution can't be good for anyone.
Cheers,
Msgr. Bob Dixon, MD, PhD, AMDG
Splarnst
Active Member
If so, then the word "religious" is meaningless and therefore useless since it fails to distinguish between anyone and anyone else.
Bob Dixon
>implying
If so, then the word "human" is meaningless and therefore useless since it fails to distinguish between anyone and anyone else.
Human is a word that distinguishes our species from others. Aside from this already being true on Earth, and even if we narrow our focus to sentient/sapient beings, it's entirely possible as far as we know that there are non-human beings with those characteristics.
I think you missed the blatant flirting -- and perhaps the playful/non-serious nature of this thread; but that's okay
Out of curiosity, what is/are the AMDG credential(s)?
Because I was put here for your pleasure and amusement, and I think you can use your imagination
I am using my imagination and I am pretty shocked at what you can do... :flirt:
I do have a question, would your irreligious morals ever let you have a perm like this:
