If We All Became Atheists?

[PureX]

Because religion takes the role of Satan for post-Christian westerners who want to believe in some kind of salvation narrative but can’t put their faith in gods to redeem them.

They are not willing to go back to the tragic view of human nature, so need to think of violence as a kind of “error” that can be “fixed” by being more “rational”.

If religion is this great font of evil then humanity can still be redeemed by science and reason which will free us from the false consciousness of religion.

It is the religious faith of those who like to kid themselves they have moved beyond the “childish” need for religious faith.

Dang! That's a pretty astute couple of observations! Sort of like making a religion of hating religion and creating a godless God of 'scientism'.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The facts are that far, far more humans have been killed by other humans for other reasons. WW1 caused the deaths of over 20 million people in the span of just a few years and religion had nothing to do with it. WW2 caused the deaths are 70 million, and again, religion had nothing to do with it. Five million died in the "Korean Conflict" and another 4 million died in the "not a war" war in Vietnam. Nearly 100 million humans dead because of warfare within the last 100 years, and NONE OF IT DUE TO RELIGION.

And these battles were all fought with weapons a bazillion times more destructive then all the wars fought before that combined.
Also the overall global population was very much bigger then before that as well, meaning much larger armies coupled with far more destructive weapons.
Maybe that had something to do with it as well?

Take the crusades. Take the army of both sides and multiple the number of soldiers by 100. So 4.5 million crusaders instead of a mere 45.000
Now replace their swords and arrows with M16s, P90s, Tanks, F16's, mortars etc.

Don't you think the bodycount would go up?

And yet your brain simply will not accept this information. Why?

Our brains have no problem processing this information. But your brain seems to be unable to understand the underlying reasons for it.

 

[Augustus]

That is the point. But for some people become allergic to that point when the ideology being talked about happens to be a religious one.
Then they suddenly go all up in arms about it.

If people won’t accept that religions can cause violence I agree with you.

but equally people want to insist that religions are uniquely able to cause violence which is just the same fault in reverse.

In my experience, usually it is dogmatic thinking which leads to conflict. Dogmatic thinking more easily leads to inability to compromise and increases likelihood of intolerance of "the others".

Even if we assume this is true, it still says little about religious v “not religious” ideologies though as either can be equally dogmatic.

How so?

The death tolls

 

[Heyo]

Why should we consider larger scale wars with lower frequency to be progress over smaller scale wars at higher frequency?

Because it shows that people more often refrain from wars. In the past, war was just a "fact of life", just like slavery or women be seen as second class citizens. War is now seen more and more as a bad thing. So much so that even the most belligerent countries renamed their war ministries "ministries of defence". In other countries, the defensive character of the military is enshrined in their constitutions.

 

[ChristineM]

The facts are that far, far more humans have been killed by other humans for other reasons. WW1 caused the deaths of over 20 million people in the span of just a few years and religion had nothing to do with it. WW2 caused the deaths are 70 million, and again, religion had nothing to do with it. Five million died in the "Korean Conflict" and another 4 million died in the "not a war" war in Vietnam. Nearly 100 million humans dead because of warfare within the last 100 years, and NONE OF IT DUE TO RELIGION.

And yet your brain simply will not accept this information. Why?

Through recorded history there are minimum and maximum estimates using where no hard total is known. Using an average of those and known figures where known the numbers of deaths caused because one side or both were trying to impose their god belief on the other side us over 800 million deaths.. Using maximum figures takes it over a billion, minimum figures over half a billion.

Im pretty certain I've shown you the list of wars of religion but it seems your brain simply will not accept this information. Why?

 

[Heyo]

My view is largely that things change, but that human nature remains pretty much the same.

Not better or worse, just different according to the environment and technology.

What do you see as "human nature"? Is it just genetics? In that case, I'd mostly agree. We are still monkeys. We lost the hair, but not the aggression.
But we are a social species and we have culture. It is the culture that has changed. And culturally, violence isn't as much tolerated as in the past.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The facts are that far, far more humans have been killed by other humans for other reasons. WW1 caused the deaths of over 20 million people in the span of just a few years and religion had nothing to do with it.

One of the big factors in why World War 1 happened when and how it did was that the heads of state were chosen based on heredity - in a system intertwined with religion - rather than on how well they could do things like, say, diplomacy.

WW2 caused the deaths are 70 million, and again, religion had nothing to do with it.

The Holocaust was basically Hitler taking Martin Luther's ideas about the "sinfulness" of Jews and what to do about it and just implementing it zealously. The Holocaust is as religious as the Protestant Reformation.

In the East, State Shinto pervaded all aspects of Japanese society and government, including its decision to go to war in the first place.

Near the end of the war, the Japanese refusal to accept unconditional surrender even when it was clear that defeat was inevitable was mostly based on concerns that the Emperor could be executed, which was unthinkable because of his religious status. Hundreds of thousands - maybe millions - of people died needlessly because of this influence of religion.

Five million died in the "Korean Conflict" and another 4 million died in the "not a war" war in Vietnam.

On Korea:

An overlooked dimension of the Korean War: The role of Christianity and American missionaries in the rise of Korean nationalism, anti -colonialism, and eventual civil war, 1884-1953

This dissertation reveals how religious factors affected the development of the Korean War. Much prior research has analyzed the causes and nature of the Korean War, in part because of the war's impact upon later events, from the Cold War to the present day geopolitical standoff. Though the war...

scholarworks.wm.edu

Due to the pro-American stance of the Christian churches, the Communist regime of North Korea regarded Christianity as an anti-patriotic religion. Because of this belief, the North Korean regime intensified its anti-religious campaigns, and tried to wipe out Christians in the post-bellum period.

Event .::. UCLA International Institute

Explore UCLA International Institute's diverse programs and initiatives that connect global perspectives with local insights. Discover news, events, academic offerings, and research impacting communities in Los Angeles and around the world. Join our journey in shaping international education and...

international.ucla.edu

Nearly 100 million humans dead because of warfare within the last 100 years, and NONE OF IT DUE TO RELIGION.

And yet your brain simply will not accept this information. Why?

"Because you're pulling these claims out of your butt" seems like the obvious answer.

 

[PureX]

Through recorded history there are minimum and maximum estimates using where no hard total is known. Using an average of those and known figures where known the numbers of deaths caused because one side or both were trying to impose their god belief on the other side us over 800 million deaths

You would be very hard pressed to find ANY wars where that was the actual reason for the fighting.

 

[PureX]

One of the big factors in why World War 1 happened when and how it did was that the heads of state were chosen based on heredity - in a system intertwined with religion - rather than on how well they could do things like, say, diplomacy.

So in your mind, ANY connection to religion, no matter how abstract or remote, is now the CAUSE OF THE WAR.

The Holocaust was basically Hitler taking Martin Luther's ideas about the "sinfulness" of Jews and what to do about it and just implementing it zealously. The Holocaust is as religious as the Protestant Reformation.

In the East, State Shinto pervaded all aspects of Japanese society and government, including its decision to go to war in the first place.

Near the end of the war, the Japanese refusal to accept unconditional surrender even when it was clear that defeat was inevitable was mostly based on concerns that the Emperor could be executed, which was unthinkable because of his religious status. Hundreds of thousands - maybe millions - of people died needlessly because of this influence of religion.

On Korea:

An overlooked dimension of the Korean War: The role of Christianity and American missionaries in the rise of Korean nationalism, anti -colonialism, and eventual civil war, 1884-1953

This dissertation reveals how religious factors affected the development of the Korean War. Much prior research has analyzed the causes and nature of the Korean War, in part because of the war's impact upon later events, from the Cold War to the present day geopolitical standoff. Though the war...

scholarworks.wm.edu

Event .::. UCLA International Institute

Explore UCLA International Institute's diverse programs and initiatives that connect global perspectives with local insights. Discover news, events, academic offerings, and research impacting communities in Los Angeles and around the world. Join our journey in shaping international education and...

international.ucla.edu

"Because you're pulling these claims out of your butt" seems like the obvious answer.

How are you not embarrassed to post this nonsense?

 

[ChristineM]

You would be very hard pressed to find ANY wars where that was the actual reason for the fighting.

Thats probably the worst ever sloping shoulder excuse I've ever heard.

Examples off the top of my head..

The French wars of religion.
The English civil war.
The 30 years war

 

[PureX]

Thats probably the worst ever sloping shoulder excuse I've ever heard.

Examples off the top of my head..

The French wars of religion.
The English civil war.
The 30 years war

Those were all about political power and the control of resources (people and wealth) ... which group would get to rule the roost. They used religion to justify their claim to the throne and their right to fight for it. But religion was never the motive. Wealth, power, and social control was the motive. As it pretty much ALWAYS is with we humans. No one has ever really cared what gods anyone else worshiped. All that has ever mattered is being in control of the circumstances and the resources. And that was never a 'religious' motive.

 

[ChristineM]

Those were all about political power and the control of resources (people and wealth) ... which group would get to rule the roost. They used religion to justify their claim to the throne and their right to fight for it. But religion was never the motive. Wealth, power, and social control was the motive. As it pretty much ALWAYS is with we humans. No one has ever really cared what gods anyone else worshiped. All that has ever mattered is being in control of the circumstances and the resources. And that was never a 'religious' motive.

French wars of religion... A clue is in the name.

There is no point on continuing, you are blind to facts that upset your beliefs.

 

[PureX]

French wars of religion... A clue is in the name.

Sure, because names are never misleading. And dictionaries are temples of logic and reason.

There is no point on continuing, you are blind to facts that upset your beliefs.

**chuckling**

 

[ChristineM]

Sure, because names are never misleading.

**chuckling**

How pathetic, all it takes is google a bit of history and you will educate yourself.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So in your mind, ANY connection to religion, no matter how abstract or remote, is now the CAUSE OF THE WAR.

No. Here's how it works:

For a given situation, we ask ourselves, "if not for the influence of religion, what would the outcome have been?" The difference between that outcome and the actual outcome is the effect of religion.

Religion's influence on wars isn't just about inspiring Crusades and the like (though I'm sure that you can also come up with some bull**** argument for why even the Crusades weren't about religion). Sometimes, religion's influence is to prop up political structures that allow incompetent people to hold positions of power.

How are you not embarrassed to post this nonsense?

Because unlike you, I actually know what I'm talking about here.

Have you ever read any of Martin Luther's religious treatise On the Jews and their Lies? Hitler quoted it heavily in Mein Kampf and used it almost as a playbook in his campaigns against Jews.

 

[PureX]

No. Here's how it works:

For a given situation, we ask ourselves, "if not for the influence of religion,

How does anyone know the "influence of religion" on anyone else's behavior? If I hold up a flag bearing stars and bars as I run into a battle looking to kill other human beings, did the flag "influence me" to me do this? Would I have done this without a flag to fly? If you were to ask me why I was doing this, and I pointed at the flag, would that mean the flag made me do it? Would it mean that my belief in the flag made me do it? But what does it mean to believe in a flag? It's just a cloth with stars and bars on it.

Same with religion. It's a flag. And emblem. But an emblem of what? ... All kinds of things to all kinds of men.

The problem here is that "religion" is a whole collection of ideas and admonishments that any person can interpret any way they want. So claiming that a person did something because of their religion doesn't really tell us anything about what actually happened.

What I do know is this, I have never met anyone that actually cared enough about what gods anyone else "believed in" to want to kill them. And I see nothing at all that would convince me that any man fighting in a so called "religious war" throughout the centuries cared about this, either. Instead, what they cared about is what men have always cared about, and fought and killed each other over ... rape, pillage, and subjugation: wealth, power, and resource control. These are what drive men to kill each other. Not who worships what gods.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

All are born agnostic, not atheist. One can't be born an atheist without any conception of God or gods.

That's your choice of how to use that word. I consider babies atheists, but it doesn't matter if others don't. If that's your definition, then perhaps the description of an atheist for you should be "One who answers no when asked if he or she has a bod belief" rather than merely one who lacks a god belief.

Dis-belief is a very painful thing.

Not for long. Once one accepts that the universe might be godless, that self-awareness is likely extinguished at death, that there is likely nobody watching over us or interested in our prayers and the like, it's actually easier than theism, but one needs to get over that hump, which is unlikely if not accomplished by midlife.

Society would also become more sexually corrupted and move away from traditional family unit.

Without religion there wouldn't be a concept of corrupt sex. How people organize their families is nobody else's business as long as the law is being observed. You may know that the Republican VP nominee expressed a similar sentiment. He's a theist like you who thinks that whether women have babies is his business and determines their societal value.

More families without children just tells you that now that that is a socially acceptable option, it's one people are choosing more often - just like atheism itself.

George Washington was an actual person. But he is a mythical fictional character to us all, now.

No, Washington was a historical figure. You're making the mistake Trump makes when he refers to Hannibal Lecter as a historical figure, but in reverse.

I donlt need to read anyone's mind to know what they cannot do.

That's what I've told you and many others multiple times when you and they tell me that they have spiritual truths or have experienced a god.

No, [minds] all work pretty much the same.

I might have agreed with you not that long ago, but I witnessed pandemic denial, the rise of MAGAism, flat-earthism, and claims of climate change hoax.

There is no need to be convinced of anything. Just willing to go along with it.

That doesn't sound like a bad idea to you?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Religious institutions are as prone to corruption and abuse, as are all human institutions.

As prone? What human institution compares the Catholic Church's pedophilia coverup?

Carlin said it well:

"When it comes to bull****, big-time, major league bull****, you have to stand in awe of the all-time champion of false promises and exaggerated claims, religion. No contest. No contest. Religion. Religion easily has the greatest bull**** story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time! But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bull**** story. Holy Sh**!"

Because without God’s help loving others, especially those who have harmed or threatened to harm us, may prove too difficult.

Those are called enemies, and it a fool who loves somebody who intends him harm. Such people need to be excommunicated from one's life and no resources shared with them.

Killing in the name of religion generally requires men to ignore the dogma and doctrines, since love, mercy, compassion and justice are core values in most of the world’s religions.

Why wouldn't they ignore such words? Behavior is taught by example, not from words read from a pulpit.

Also, the Christian god doesn't have those qualities. You don't get to punish the human race with the loss of paradise and immortality, nearly drown it all, offer a human sacrifice that has to be believed in to be able to stomach being near humans, unleash Satan on mankind, and build a torture pit and staff it with demons and then use any of those words to describe yourself.

Not sure why you only see the bad in religion, but never the good?

I'm with him there. What good?

Humanism does good for the world. Religion as I'm used to it is divisive and tribal. Abrahamic religions teach bigotry and anti-intellectualism. They teach that believing by faith is a virtue. It is not. It's a logical error that always generates non sequiturs which are either false or unfalsifiable, and if one somehow actually guessed correctly, he's have no way to know that he was correct without empirical confirmation.

Yes, we're all familiar with the dishonest practice of selecting a handful of verses out of context, in order to discredit an entire religion. It's calculated to mislead, and it's intellectually lazy.

They're the words your god supposedly spoke. If they were calculated to mislead, it wasn't by the skeptics who read them back to believers.

What would atheists have to obsess about, if there were no God and no religion?

Atheists don't care about gods and religions.

A better question would be what would theists obsess about if there were no gods or religions?

Newborn babies are closer to God than adults can ever hope to be

What about puppies?

I suspect that animals are more immersed in both nature and the now than we humans, since they (probably) lack the capacity for abstract thought which seems to cause in us a degree of separation from our immediate context.

That also describes baby humans, who you say are closer to gods than you are.

If atheism were appealing to the masses, you wouldn’t have to promote it.

We don't. It's religion that needs to be sold.

And if atheism is reasonable, rational and beneficial, and man has no need for God or religion, than God and religion will finally meet the fate Nietzsche declared had already come to pass

Atheism is all of that, but most people don't reason very well. Religion won't ever disappear as long as there are people making a living selling it.
but Christianity is fading into relative irrelevance now in countries where people are educated in the liberal arts, which is all that the rest of us ask of it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How does anyone know the "influence of religion" on anyone else's behavior?

This seems like a question you should have asked yourself before going off arguing that religion doesn't influence wars.

If I hold up a flag bearing stars and bars as I run into a battle looking to kill other human beings, did the flag "influence me" to me do this? Would I have done this without a flag to fly? If you were to ask me why I was doing this, and I pointed at the flag, would that mean the flag made me do it? Would it mean that my belief in the flag made me do it? But what does it mean to believe in a flag? It's just a cloth with stars and bars on it.

Same with religion. It's a flag. And emblem. But an emblem of what? ... All kinds of things to all kinds of men.

You want me to explain to you how to estimate the impact of one factor on an outcome? Yeah... I don't see that as a good use of my time.

The problem here is that "religion" is a whole collection of ideas and admonishments that any person can interpret any way they want.

No, it really isn't.

So claiming that a person did something because of their religion doesn't really tell us anything about what actually happened.

If you don't understand how people's beliefs, motivations and social norms - e.g. religion - can influence their actions and the outcomes of those actions, this is really a "you" problem.

What I do know is this, I have never met anyone that actually cared enough about what gods anyone else "believed in" to want to kill them. And I see nothing at all that would convince me that any man fighting in a so called "religious war" throughout the centuries cared about this, either.

Kind of irrelevant. How many people do you know who care about British hegemony over the Falkland Islands? Probably none. Probably a lot of the frontline combatants in the Falklands War didn't really care about it personally... despite this, nearly a thosand people still died because of opposing views on British hegemony over the Falkland Islands.

Instead, what they cared about is what men have always cared about, and fought and killed each other over ... rape, pillage, and subjugation: wealth, power, and resource control. These are what drive men to kill each other. Not who worships what gods.

Why would you ever think that religion and any of those things are mutually exclusive?

And you seem to have very strange ideas about how war works. A lot of the time in war, what's driving most frontline soldiers is just a desire not to die and to not have their friends die... and that's it. But the fact that they've been thrust into a situation where "not dying" involves killing enemy soldiers is the product of all sorts of influencing factors, including religion.

 

[Heyo]

What I do know is this, I have never met anyone that actually cared enough about what gods anyone else "believed in" to want to kill them. And I see nothing at all that would convince me that any man fighting in a so called "religious war" throughout the centuries cared about this, either. Instead, what they cared about is what men have always cared about, and fought and killed each other over ... rape, pillage, and subjugation: wealth, power, and resource control. These are what drive men to kill each other. Not who worships what gods.

You don't seem to have a very high opinion about the influence of people's belief. Do you also think that most religious charities are just scams to rape, pillage and subjugate? You'd be mostly right, but even I make some concessions.