Is religion logical

[columbus]

I believe it makes a lot more sense to believe an intelligence exists than to believe a whole logical system of nature exists. The intelligence behind nature makes more sense than it just existing.

But can you explain why it makes more sense to anybody who doesn't share your unevidenced opinions about god?
I am 58, and nobody has done that yet. When they fail the attempt, the explanation is usually some form of "You must first believe in my opinions before they will make sense."
Tom

 

[George-ananda]

Is religion logical

Any religion that is worthwhile must not violate logic, so I'll go with 'Yes' as my answer.

 

[Windwalker]

I believe art can be quite logical although the way some people practice it, it is random.

Art that is logical, makes no logical sense. Art is a non-rational expression, like love. Do you say you logically love someone? If so, is that actually love, and not merely a reasoned position devoid of feeling, like a Mr. Spock concluding its practical applications for procreation?

 

[columbus]

I believe art can be quite logical although the way some people practice it, it is random.

Art, in general, is designed to appeal to irrational tendencies humans have.
Why, for instance, does anybody care about a fictional landscape? Especially when nonfictional photographs can be made. Because people aren't really all that rational. We like things, from movement to sounds to paint daubs to stories, that reflect our inner selves and feelings instead of reality.
Sometimes, often, to the point of ignoring the reality in favor of the unreal.
Tom

 

[illykitty]

Do you mean to say are there rational reasons for religions to exist?

Of course. There's community, traditions, rituals, common ethical code and so on. It probably played a role in unifying people and to help our survival. It's rational to want these things, so some find them in religion and some people find them outside of organised religions. Communities based on hobbies, fandom or videogames, for instance.

 

[Muffled]

But can you explain why it makes more sense to anybody who doesn't share your unevidenced opinions about god?
I am 58, and nobody has done that yet. When they fail the attempt, the explanation is usually some form of "You must first believe in my opinions before they will make sense."
Tom

How about if a ball rolls into the street. It is easier to believe a child will chase after that ball than to believe it just got there all by itself.

 

[ratiocinator]

I believe it makes a lot more sense to believe an intelligence exists than to believe a whole logical system of nature exists. The intelligence behind nature makes more sense than it just existing.

But why is a universe with an intelligence "behind" it any less mysterious than just a universe? An intelligence that creates a universe must be a far more complex logical system than the universe it creates.

Rather than solve a mystery, it adds to it.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

I believe I never realized that. I suppose it was just too easy for me to dismiss it entirely.

PS: For those who are new the spaghetti monster has made an appearance in previous debates.

Some like to believe in a flying spaghetti multiverse..

 

[Muffled]

Art that is logical, makes no logical sense. Art is a non-rational expression, like love. Do you say you logically love someone? If so, is that actually love, and not merely a reasoned position devoid of feeling, like a Mr. Spock concluding its practical applications for procreation?

I believe art often expresses feelings but it can be logical as well. My brother was asked to paint a covered bridge (something that still exists in NH) When he was done the bank of the river had a rock garden on it. That was completely logical since he was a rock gardener and river banks often contain rocks.

I believe that depends on whether one is talking about the emotion of love or the active practice of caring for a person.

I believe Spock missed the boat because people often procreate without love and often because of a need for sex.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

But why is a universe with an intelligence "behind" it any less mysterious than just a universe? An intelligence that creates a universe must be a far more complex logical system than the universe it creates.

Rather than solve a mystery, it adds to it.

As quantum mechanics,the Big Bang and DNA complicated the picture and added to the mystery.

The desire to quit at the easiest explanation has always hindered scientific progress.

 

[columbus]

How about if a ball rolls into the street. It is easier to believe a child will chase after that ball than to believe it just got there all by itself.

No.
The difference between the origins of reality and the ball is that we know a lot about balls, children, streets, and such. The origins of reality we don't know much about, I am not particularly convinced we can know anything important about that at this time.
Tom

 

[columbus]

The desire to quit at the easiest explanation has always hindered scientific progress.

The same desire also is a fundamental reason for religion. If the answer to an important question is "Nobody knows ", and that makes people uncomfortable, religion will often step right up and deliver something irrational and take credit for making people feel better.
Tom

 

[ratiocinator]

As quantum mechanics,the Big Bang and DNA complicated the picture and added to the mystery.

There was actual evidence for those...

 

[Guy Threepwood]

The same desire also is a fundamental reason for religion. If the answer to an important question is "Nobody knows ", and that makes people uncomfortable, religion will often step right up and deliver something irrational and take credit for making people feel better.
Tom

But it was a response to what atheists usually say- that God is too complex an answer- not as simple as theirs... so which is it?

I only know one side that acknowledges it's own faith as such..

 

[Guy Threepwood]

There was actual evidence for those...

unlike multiverses?

 

[ratiocinator]

unlike multiverses?

Which sort?

Added: And what's your point anyway?

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Which sort?

Added: And what's your point anyway?

Does it make a difference? there's no direct empirical evidence for any explanation.- though I think we are getting closer, we are better able to find and recognize the fingerprints of intelligent v chance design

 

[shmogie]

I suppose one might engage in an illogical religion like the spaghetti monster for fun but I can't imagine anyone taking it seriously.

You cannot deny the claims of Christianity by using the laws logic. As you have been advised, another term for your skepticism would be much, much more appropriate.

 

[ratiocinator]

Does it make a difference? there's no direct empirical evidence for any explanation.

For what? Why stuff exists? If so, then no - and the intelligent response to that is to admit we don't know - not make up something that conforms to a religion or what we might like to be the case and, in any case, doesn't answer the question.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

For what? Why stuff exists? If so, then no - and the intelligent response to that is to admit we don't know - not make up something that conforms to a religion or what we might like to be the case and, in any case, doesn't answer the question.

like multiverses again?!

Out of curiosity, how confident would you say you are, of some naturalistic unguided mechanism being behind all this- 90%?