Is religion inferior to logic ?

[Aupmanyav]

And yet what other social entity is taking on that responsibility? ... None.

Society itself is the creator and maintainer of ethics and none other.

Currently our culture and society offers no means besides religion for understanding, discussing, debating, and evaluating our ethical imperatives.

That is totally wrong. If it was that every atheist would have been an ogre.

Indoctrination?
Are these children who receive religious education imbeciles, or drugged/hypnotised?

IMV, yes. They become so, parted from truth. The more religious education they receive, the more they would be like that. Religious education to children is indoctrination. That is one reason for backwardness of Muslim children not only in India but in Pakistan and Bangladesh too. This education is only a farce and inhibits Muslim children to learn other things like children from other religions. They should study religion when they grow up.

 

[Valjean]

This decay has occurred in a highly religious nation, so how can anyone avoid looking at the negative influence of bad religion? Look at your own negative attitudes towards atheists, could it be that the selfish attitudes of conservative Christianity influenced you in subtle ways? Ideally Christians have a pretty clear, albeit basic, guideline of moral behavior set out by Jesus, but boy do they struggle to follow what he taught. When believers can't even admit they aren't following their guru then how reliable is any religion as a moral guide? Look at how jihadists un Islam interpret the Quran to a degree that they justify murdering innocent people.

As I have noted I would be impressed if believers were unusually moral and balaned, and non-believers were unusually immoral, I would be impressed. But we often see non-believers able to articulate a moral framework on their own and is superior to many believers.

Of course. Believers have no need to develop a strong or well thought out internalized moral system. Then have a deontological set of external crutches to lean on. It's no wonder they're so morally unstable.

Non-believers are self-motivated. Believers are motivated by a divine carrot and stick; by reward and punishment. This translates to a pre-conditional, Kohlberg level one level of development, typical of very young children.

Levels of Developing Morality in Kohlberg's Theories

Kohlberg's theory of moral development seeks to explain how children form moral reasoning. According to Kohlberg's theory, moral development occurs in six stages.

www.verywellmind.com

It's no wonder so many religious find it difficult to imagine moral behavior without God.

 

[Valjean]

Indoctrination?
Are these children who receive religious education imbeciles, or drugged/hypnotised?

They are enculturated, like all of us, but religious, as opposed to social or humanist enculturation, has frequently yielded anti-social results.

It should be part of the syllabus, and when the child becomes of age, they can decide for themselves
whether it has any benefit to them or not.

So "part of the syllabus" is not indoctrination?
When a deontological system is downloaded before children develop logical firewalls or the ability to think critically, religious rules become part of the operating system. Deciding for themselves becomes difficult.

 

[Valjean]

Yep, and none of these are being taught in our schools. None of our politicians have ever heard of them, or if they have, they certainly never speak of the ethical imperatives these people studied and debated. What percentage of the average citizenry do you think have any idea at all who any of those people are or what any of those people contributed to the human discussion on ethics? How many famous celebrities that we watch and admire routinely just because they entertain us know of or will ever even mention any of them?

Hear, hear!

The only place any of the ethical ideals those people studied will EVER be uttered in public will be buried in some religious sermon given in some church some Sunday. And it will have almost no effect at all on anyone in the face of the 24-7 commercial advertising that we are all constantly subjected to by our capitalist overlords.

Yes. Especially since the neolioberal, Reagan/Thatcher Revolution, "greed is good" and "every man for himself" have been our social norms.

But don't the political progressives; the 'Radical Socialists' the Right rails against, constantly cite liberal, pro-social ideals? Aren't there lots of private, non religious organizations promoting ethical ideals?

 

[muhammad_isa]

When a deontological system is downloaded before children develop logical firewalls or the ability to think critically, religious rules become part of the operating system. Deciding for themselves becomes difficult.

I don't think so.
We always have the choice to "drop out" of society .. or church or family.

 

[Valjean]

No. For one thing religion does not stop anyone from learning about other ideas. And for another, no child can or should have a multitude of meta-ideas (like theism) dumped on them. It would be too confusing and they lack the life experience to reasonably assess them.

I beg to differ. Religion has been actively suppressing unorthodox opinions and secular learning for 2,000 years. Even today, fundamentalists denounce science and higher education.

 

[Valjean]

I don't think so.
We always have the choice to "drop out" of society .. or church or family.

Yes, just like everyone has the option to pull himself up by his bootstraps and be a success....

 

[Bird123]

Yeah, God/Gods is/are not hiding anything except him/themselves, so that the religious can make various different stories about him/them and continue fighting and perpetrating atrocities on each other. What a perfect game, does not ever end!

An action of God: Knowledge is not given. Wisdom is acquired on the journey to acquire knowledge.

There are many many reasons God doesn't visit everyone. If you understood what God is doing, it would be clear why. That's not to say God visits no one.

God will never intimidate choices or tell one what to choose. Further, the lessons involved would not be lessons anymore. Would you be intimidated by a visit from God?

Religion is a catalyst that brings so many of mankind's problems to the surface so they can be dealt with. After all, when one thinks one has God's blessings, one can justify anything.

The dynamics of a multilevel classroom of this scale is amazing. Everyone wants to have it made and have peace. This will not happen until the lessons are learned. Of course, there are the new students.

People and God carry different goals. Kiddies seem to hate going to school. On the other hand, most are glad they did when they are done. When one is capable of creating a heavenly state for themselves and others, the journey will be well worth it to get to that level.

Yes, God created everyone. On the other hand, God isn't through creating us yet. The best is yet to come. It is all being done through our own free choices. In time, we will all Discover what the best choices really are.

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

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I beg to differ. Religion has been actively suppressing unorthodox opinions and secular learning for 2,000 years. Even today, fundamentalists denounce science and higher education.

Well, no all religious people are fundamentalists. E.g. just go to a site for Objectivists for the Ayn Rand kind and you can find philosophical fundamentalists there.
So yes , I get you and no, it is too simple.

 

[Bird123]

You make it sound as if religious concepts have evidence. They don't. Are you oen minded to Islam and willing to convert? If not, why not?

Being open minded means being able to consider evidence, but theists don't offer evidence that allows a critical mind to be convinced. You are heavily criticized for many claims and failing to offer evidence, and that is your fault. Addressing open minds means you NEED to present evidence.

Your claims are not facts. You might think they are, but you are mistaken. I'm not sure how a person can be so confused about what a fact is and isn't.

You ost claims and beliefs but offer no facts or coherent explanation. There is nothing to agree with in what you post. You have an inflated belief about what you believe as if you are some sort of guru. This is why religion is inferior to logic, it is subjective belief that can be believed without evidence.

Critical thinkers try, but theists are stubborn.

Anyone can offer something to others, but there has to be a coherency to what is said for it to have any impact on otehrs. Religion tends to be repeated beliefs that are not unique.

There is nothing beyond the physical that is known to exist. This is an example of a non-fact by you.

Theists offer no "other side" that is fact-based and rational.

You don't have a solid grasp on what is real and what is imagined.

Not to believe in irrational concepts.

No gods are known to exist. You can't have knowledge about fictional characters by insisting they are real.

You seem to be in this category. Of course every religious believer finds what they are looking for, it's just not factual. If you think you found God I suggest you found an idea that others talked about and you adopted some version of it.

Critical thinkers seek truth by following facts and using reason. Religious folks don't.

Words are cheap, and that is why it's wise to be a critical thinker and not be too hasty and willing to believe in ideas that make the ego feel satisfied.

You still do not Understand. It isn't up to anyone. It will always be your choice what you seek. You want evidence? The evidence stares you in the face. Look around you.

For some reason you want God not to exist. Great, then do not seek God. What do you seek? Do you seek to be right? Do you seek to prove others wrong?

I wonder about something. I have said that no religion really understands God at all. When I speak of God you always point back to the religions we both agree do not understand. This holds very little water.

One who seeks asks many many questions. Perhaps you should question yourself to Discover what is it that you really seek.

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

 

[Audie]

I beg to differ. Religion has been actively suppressing unorthodox opinions and secular learning for 2,000 years. Even today, fundamentalists denounce science and higher education.

Winner frubal

 

[Bird123]

After opening to all possibilities, they must be sorted and the unsound ones dropped. How is the dross to be eliminated if not by critical assessment of tested facts?

Facts are accepted when they're evidenced and tested. Your religious 'facts' are not.
Discovering these facts for yourself would involve the scientific method, would it not? Facts require obeservation and objective verification.

Theists don't place logic and reason first. They make claims about things beyond the physical, but without objective evidence. There is no middle when one side brings nothing substantial to the table.

But wouldn't a wise man become so by sorting the unevidenced from the myriad claims? What methods would a wise man use for this?

Huh?
There are endless claims about what is. They can't all be right. Wisdom lies in distinguishing the right from the not-right; the 'WHAT IS' from WHAT IS NOT.

Knowing "WHAT IS" depends on being right. Being right depends on critical analysis and fact-checked evidence, ie: "placing reason and logic first."

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

You are walking in the desert and ran out of water when you bump into me. I tell you there is water 2 miles east at an oasis. I gave you a fact yet you only have a belief. What you choose to seek is entirely up to you. You can say I gave you my belief that there is water, discount what I said, then walk in the opposite direction.

I have place truth and facts in your life. Like God, I make no demands. Freely choose what you seek. If you expect me or God to serve up beliefs for you to accept or reject, it's not going to happen.

Are you so sure of your ways you never question them? Could the evidence be staring you in the face? How long did mankind watch birds fly before they figured out how? The knowledge was staring them all along.

An Action of God: God has made this world so that in the end Brains wins. It's going to take a wide view and advanced thinking to see how flight is possible. On the other hand, God has placed the answers all around. They wait for us all to Discover them.

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

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

After opening to all possibilities, they must be sorted and the unsound ones dropped. How is the dross to be eliminated if not by critical assessment of tested facts?

Facts are accepted when they're evidenced and tested. Your religious 'facts' are not.
Discovering these facts for yourself would involve the scientific method, would it not? Facts require obeservation and objective verification.

Theists don't place logic and reason first. They make claims about things beyond the physical, but without objective evidence. There is no middle when one side brings nothing substantial to the table.

But wouldn't a wise man become so by sorting the unevidenced from the myriad claims? What methods would a wise man use for this?

Huh?
There are endless claims about what is. They can't all be right. Wisdom lies in distinguishing the right from the not-right; the 'WHAT IS' from WHAT IS NOT.

Knowing "WHAT IS" depends on being right. Being right depends on critical analysis and fact-checked evidence, ie: "placing reason and logic first."

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

Okay, do that with this:

Science has limits: A few things that science does not do - Understanding Science

undsci.berkeley.edu

Natural science works in a limited way. What do you do for the rest, that which science can't do?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Winner frubal

So how do you this, which science can't do:

Science has limits: A few things that science does not do - Understanding Science

undsci.berkeley.edu

 

[Valjean]

So how do you this, which science can't do:

Science has limits: A few things that science does not do - Understanding Science

undsci.berkeley.edu

But science doesn't even claim to do these things. It knows its limitations. It stays in its lane -- which is more than can be said of religion.

 

[PureX]

Society itself is the creator and maintainer of ethics and none other.

Not at the moment. It’s a ship without a captain, compass, or a rudder. And no one on board is even discussing how or where it needs to go.

 

[PureX]

Do you consider Humanism and Ethical Culturism religions?
How about university philosophy departments or social studies in high school.

Zero effect on the public.

Haven't people been bemoaning the moral decay of society for several millennia? Haven't many wars been motivated and encouraged by religion? Hasn't religion been responsible for much human misery and crimes against humanity?

No.

If capitalist greed and Fascism have been driving anti-social behavior, perhaps we should switch to a socialist system, instead.

So far we’re so lost that we can’t even see the need. Yet …

Walmart stores are being closed in cities all across the country because people are simply walking into them and stealing whatever they want.

Even the giant corporate thieves of Walmart can’t cope with the blatant lawlessness that‘s been happening in our cities. Does that sound normal to you? We have homeless camps popping up on city streets all across the country populated by drugged out zombies. Does that sound normal to you? We have working families living in cars and camper vans all across the country because they can’t afford housing even with a full time job. Does that sound normal to you?

Greed, selfishness and willful stupidity are running rampant in our business, government, churches, and in the streets because we have become a nation with no sense of shame, honor, respect, or responsibility toward each other. We have no ethical imperatives beyond our own base selfishness. And I have never witnessed anything like it in my 65 years living here.

 

[PureX]

Hear, hear!

Yes. Especially since the neolioberal, Reagan/Thatcher Revolution, "greed is good" and "every man for himself" have been our social norms.

But don't the political progressives; the 'Radical Socialists' the Right rails against, constantly cite liberal, pro-social ideals? Aren't there lots of private, non religious organizations promoting ethical ideals?

No. All I see being promoted is selfishness, greed, and willful stupidity. By business, by government, by religion, and by the culture itself.

 

[PureX]

I beg to differ. Religion has been actively suppressing unorthodox opinions and secular learning for 2,000 years. Even today, fundamentalists denounce science and higher education.

And it has very clearly failed to do so.

 

[F1fan]

Fear, greed, ignorance, etc., poisons everything it touches, including religion.

Well, what a negative strike against religion. So what can we humans use? I suggest humanism. YOu'll never find a humanist hijack planes and fly them into buildings, or lie about science for some other irrational view. Notice how the Gods of every religion agree with every believer, even when religious beliefs conflict?

And the advent of industrial strength capitalism with it's commercial advertising pushing the message of selfish materialism 24-7 and it's "every man for himself" immorality have pretty much overwhelmed everything in it's path. Blaming religion for failing and succumbing to it is a waste of time.

Well, those caitalists were largely Christian and I have to wonder why religion couldn't keep these people fair and moral. How about you, do you have any clue why religion fails its promises?

We can also blame government, art, science, culture, and ourselves for falling victim to it's relentless immorality. And even as religion has been the only entity even remotely trying to stand against this onslaught of moral decay here you are attacking it. And wanting to get rid of it all together.

Interracial marriage is one of the immoral flaws of progress (according to certain theists). Gay marriage is too (according to some theists). It's typical that certain people in societies will push the boundaries of "acceptable" and it often gets accepted eventually.

And replace it with what? Abject Darwinian selfishness?

I have no idea what this means.

I just don't like willful ignorance and dishonesty.

What about self-deceived ignorance? Willful ignorance is someone who knows the truth but lies, yet we see many believers who are sincere in their beliefs in irrational and absurd ideas. Is that excusable? How is that not a form of dishonesty?

If you convince yourself of a lie then you can sincerely tell others the "truth".

I have no argument with atheism itself. And there is just as much willful ignorance and dishonesty among theists as atheists.

Yet you don't explain how atheists are willfully ignorant of anything to the degree that atheists can tell theists of their bad frameworks of belief. Why is that if you are correct? You often mischaracterize atheists and their positions on issues, so how is that not "willful ignorance" that you accuse others of doing? What are you doing about it?

Yes. It's a very hard row to hoe in the face of the relentless onslaught of selfishness and greed that fuels every aspect of our current culture. Especially when even the religious organizations claiming to represent Jesus' message have become poisoned by it.

Doesn't thta give you pause about whether religion is true and valid at face value? If some sort of God exists as imagined by believers would it allow this to happen? If I was a God and went through the trouble of getting a woman pregnant, and then setting up a scenario for the kid to be executed so that his death will pay me for the sins of mankind (even though this is the world I created), then I would expect believers to take it f•cking seriously. Only the liberal side seems to follow the teaching of the kid.

Still, they are the ONLY moral guides we have.

Really? What about atheists who follow their own moral sense to decent results? Those who need to be followers don't seem to have good enough sense of WHO to follow. There might be your problem: thinking you need to be a follower. We should encourage people to think for themselves.

Yes, they are failing us, or we are failing them, ... it doesn't really matter which. But where ELSE is moral guidance and reasoning going to come from? The capitalists have all the power, and it sure isn't going to come from them! We see billionaires with the moral/ethical maturity level of the average spoiled 5-year-old. Presidents and celebrities being praised for being even LESS then that! And where is the voice of ethical and moral maturity, and reason coming from? What institution has been created and empowered to shine the light of such wisdom into the selfish darkness?

You seem to be committed to being a follower.

There is none.

Then don't be a follower.

And still you want to destroy the only aspect of our culture that even attempts it. And why? Because it so often fails in that attempt. This doesn't even make sense.

You admit that religion is corrupted, so why trust it? Could it be because you are a follower of reloigion and have a personal motive not to recognize its uselessness? You are capable of thinking for yourself, but perhaps you lack the confidence.

Look at how many Muslims DON'T interpret their religion in that way. Also, keep in mind that a lot of the world's Muslims dislike and disrespect the west precisely BECAUSE of it's blatant greed, selfishness, and immorality.

All religion is in the eye of beholder because their Gods are absent. No wonder there are so many, and why all of them can't agfee with themselves. Total chaos, and you think they offer moral guidance? Try thinking as a human with agency.