If religion is a placebo...

[Mock Turtle]

What could be more worthwhile and productive than the search for truth, even if the truth remains elusive?

Well, perhaps it takes something extra as to determining which is the more useful as to 'truths' (not claiming I have such), when so many of these tend to lead one down a blind alley. I'm always open to truth - as long as it doesn't necessary oblige me as to believing anything because it just might simply appeal to me.

 

[Colt]

... what is the real medicine?

What do you think?

It's from the phrase "Opium of the people", a metaphor used by proponents of Marxism and other Atheist ideology.

The full sentence from Marx translates (including italics) as: "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."[5]​

The metaphor has been used in various forms by different figures in history but Marx was all about it! Marx made the same arguments that Atheists make in debates on this forum.

WIKI

Opium of the people - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Main article: Marxism and religion
Marx wrote this passage in 1843 as part of the introduction to Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right, a book that criticized philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's 1820 book, Elements of the Philosophy of Right. This introduction was published in 1844 in a small journal called Deutsch–Französische Jahrbücher; however, the book itself was published posthumously. As the journal had a print run of just 1,000 copies, it had no popular effect during the 19th century. The phrase became better known during the 1930s, when Marxism became more popular.[3]

The quotation, in context, reads as follows (italics in original translation):[5]

The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.​

​

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people [bold added].​

​

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.​

​

Metaphor​

Marx used the phrase to make a structural-functionalist argument about religion, and particularly about organized religion.[2][3] In his view, religion may be false, but it is a function of something real.[7] Specifically, Marx believed that religion had certain practical functions in society that were similar to the function of opium in a sick or injured person: it reduced people's immediate suffering and provided them with pleasant illusions which gave them the strength to carry on. In this sense, while Marx may have no sympathy for religion itself, he has deep sympathy for those proletariat who put their trust in it.[4][7]

At the same time, Marx saw religion as harmful to revolutionary goals: by focusing on the eternal rather than the temporal, religion turns the attention of the oppressed away from the exploitation and class structure that encompasses their everyday lives. In the process, religion helps to foster a kind of false consciousness that emboldens cultural values and beliefs that support and validate the continued dominance of the ruling class. It thereby prevents the socialist revolution, the overthrowing of capitalism, and the establishment of a classless, socialist society.[4] In Marx's view, once workers finally overthrow capitalism, unequal social relations will no longer need legitimating and people's alienation will dissolve, along with any need for religion.[4]

 

[RestlessSoul]

Well, perhaps it takes something extra as to determining which is the more useful as to 'truths' (not claiming I have such), when so many of these tend to lead one down a blind alley. I'm always open to truth - as long as it doesn't necessary oblige me as to believing anything because it just might simply appeal to me.

Why would you feel obliged to believe anything that didn’t make sense to you? Wouldn’t that be a contradiction in terms in any case?

 

[PureX]

What about those truths that we hold to be self-evident? Can we never know them either?

We can never know how what we don't know would change what we think we know, if we knew it. So without omniscience, our knowledge is always presumed, but never certain. Even that which appears self-evident to us.

 

[Colt]

We can never know how what we don't know would change what we think we know, if we knew it. So without omniscience, our knowledge is always presumed, but never certain. Even that which appears self-evident to us.

YES! What he said! ^^

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

... what is the real medicine?

What do you think?

Rational reasoning.

 

[RestlessSoul]

We can never know how what we don't know would change what we think we know, if we knew it. So without omniscience, our knowledge is always presumed, but never certain. Even that which appears self-evident to us.

Maybe. Nonetheless, I believe that however elusive it may be, absolute truth does exist, at least as an unobtainable ideal; and that we can draw closer to it, as we draw closer to a God of our understanding.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Why would you feel obliged to believe anything that didn’t make sense to you? Wouldn’t that be a contradiction in terms in any case?

It's not always what makes sense - how do you know when you are making decisions as to beliefs when such might simply appeal? That is, how do you know how honest or impartial is one's own reasoning?

 

[RestlessSoul]

It's not always what makes sense - how do you know when you are making decisions as to beliefs when such might simply appeal? That is, how do you know how honest or impartial is one's own reasoning?

Well you have to learn, through experience but also through intuition, which of your inner voices to trust.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Well you have to learn, through experience but also through intuition, which of your inner voices to trust.

I'm not sure even that is wise - the latter. If one's motto in life was 'question everything' - not a bad one to have really - then I might agree.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I'm not sure even that is wise - the latter. If one's motto in life was 'question everything' - not a bad one to have really - then I might agree.

Perhaps. But if one’s motto in life becomes “trust nothing, believe in nothing”, then it seems to me that one is truly lost.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Perhaps. But if one’s motto in life becomes “trust nothing, believe in nothing”, then it seems to me that one is truly lost.

Lost or open? And, like most, I don't have that much difficulty in trusting many things, but such usually comes from having sufficient evidence and/or as to reflecting over whatever it is. My intuition (and as to inner voices) is not something I would necessarily rely on even though like many too it tends to give good results. I do know that it hasn't in the past though, and I do understand as to how my thinking and mental processes might be deceived by certain things - which seemingly can't be said as to many when they seem to accept some things which pass over a very low bar and which eludes them.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Lost or open? And, like most, I don't have that much difficulty in trusting many things, but such usually comes from having sufficient evidence and/or as to reflecting over whatever it is. My intuition (and as to inner voices) is not something I would necessarily rely on even though like many too it tends to give good results. I do know that it hasn't in the past though, and I do understand as to how my thinking and mental processes might be deceived by certain things - which seemingly can't be said as to many when they seem to accept some things which pass over a very low bar and which eludes them.

What are the exceptions to that "usually"?

 

[Mock Turtle]

What are the exceptions to that "usually"?

Lack of evidence as to either way - when a decision is necessary - or when it neither matters as to what decision is made perhaps?

 

[Bird123]

The real medicine is Discovering Truth, What Is, rather than relying on mere beliefs. We were all really meant to Know not merely believe. Perhaps one should work on this rather than ever being satisfied with mere beliefs.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[RestlessSoul]

The real medicine is Discovering Truth, What Is, rather than relying on mere beliefs. We were all really meant to Know not merely believe. Perhaps one should work on this rather than ever being satisfied with mere beliefs.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

And how do you do that?

 

[Bird123]

Question rather than accept. Put the pieces together until they add up perfectly. It's the only way to see the real picture.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[PearlSeeker]

Marx believed that religion had certain practical functions in society that were similar to the function of opium in a sick or injured person: it reduced people's immediate suffering and provided them with pleasant illusions which gave them the strength to carry on.

Why would this need dissolve in class-less (communist) society?

 

[PearlSeeker]

According to Pascal:

465
The Stoics say, "Retire within yourselves; it is there you will find your rest." And that is not true.

Others say, "Go out of yourselves; seek happiness in amusement." And this is not true. Illness comes.

Happiness is neither without us nor within us. It is in God, both without us and within us.

525
Misery induces despair, pride induces presumption. The Incarnation shows man the greatness of his misery by the greatness of the remedy which he required.

526
The knowledge of God without that of man's misery causes pride. The knowledge of man's misery without that of God causes despair. The knowledge of Jesus Christ constitutes the middle course, because in Him we find both God and our misery.

527
Jesus Christ is a God whom we approach without pride, and before whom we humble ourselves without despair.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Back to the initial question: If religion can't help you anymore because you have realised it was a placebo or because you have experienced something awfully bad/unfair, what then? What can help you as the real medicine against existential void/vacuum/emptiness?

So far we've had: learning to care for yourself, "eat and drink and be merry", meditation, nature walks, loving close relationship with at least one person, music, humor, esoteric religion, overcoming ego...

For Marcus Aurelius it was philosophy:

“Don’t return to philosophy as a task-master, but as patients seek out relief in a treatment of sore eyes, or a dressing for a burn, or from an ointment. Regarding it this way, you’ll obey reason without putting it on display and rest easy in its care.” ​