Why Aren't Religions Generally More Rational?

[Sunstone]

Assuming religions could be more rational than they are (and I believe that's a generally safe assumption), then why aren't religions more rational? Is it because people prefer something else to rationality? And if so, is that because they don't see many benefits to rationality?

Or is it because humans are greatly irrational and religions simply reflect that fact? But if that's the case, must they reflect that fact? Is a truly rational religion possible? For instance, could there be a religion that was in accord with logical reasoning and empirical evidence?

Are religions generally becoming more rational over time? Or is the appearance that at least some religions are becoming more rational over time false or misleading?

Is there some other reason religions aren't all that rational?


Please note: By rational, I mean here in accordance with logical reasoning and empirical evidence. I am not interested in notions that rationality is compatible here with embracing as true or certain any metaphysical claims, such as the existence of deity, or the non-existence of deity.

 

[psychoslice]

I think most religion has to become more rational, they cannot stay in their ignorant past beliefs, its just too ridiculers.

 

[Sees]

I think the rational has to balance out with wonder, awe, mystery, romance, etc. Kinda like art. Religion has to be a passionate art form, more than just a dry set of instructions. Inspiration and creativity need more than rationality. Maybe the deepest lust of life also.

I'm too tired to think of anything else I think my dreams tonight will be all the better for not completely grasping the rational.

 

[psychoslice]

Sounds like denial to me.

 

[Sunstone]

Sounds like denial to me.

Denial of what?

 

[JustWondering]

Human beings are driven by emotion more than logic, which makes us irrational creatures. Since religion was designed to make people feel good religion doesn't need to be rational. For religion to become more rational, human beings will have to become more rational. I don't see that happening any time soon.

 

[psychoslice]

Denial of what?

I'm sure you can work that out.

 

[Thana]

Assuming religions could be more rational than they are (and I believe that's a generally safe assumption), then why aren't religions more rational? Is it because people prefer something else to rationality? And if so, is that because they don't see many benefits to rationality?

Or is it because humans are greatly irrational and religions simply reflect that fact? But if that's the case, must they reflect that fact? Is a truly rational religion possible? For instance, could there be a religion that was in accord with logical reasoning and empirical evidence?

Are religions generally becoming more rational over time? Or is the appearance that at least some religions are becoming more rational over time false or misleading?

Is there some other reason religions aren't all that rational?


Please note: By rational, I mean here in accordance with logical reasoning and empirical evidence. I am not interested in notions that rationality is compatible here with embracing as true or certain any metaphysical claims, such as the existence of deity, or the non-existence of deity.

Well I'm not really sure how to do address this without knowing what parts of religion you find irrational.
If it's the whole of religion itself, I'd like to point out that irreligion is no more rational than religion.

 

[bobhikes]

Assuming religions could be more rational than they are (and I believe that's a generally safe assumption), then why aren't religions more rational? Is it because people prefer something else to rationality? And if so, is that because they don't see many benefits to rationality?

Or is it because humans are greatly irrational and religions simply reflect that fact? But if that's the case, must they reflect that fact? Is a truly rational religion possible? For instance, could there be a religion that was in accord with logical reasoning and empirical evidence?

Are religions generally becoming more rational over time? Or is the appearance that at least some religions are becoming more rational over time false or misleading?

Is there some other reason religions aren't all that rational?

IMO
Religions where our first answers to who, what, why, where and when? Rational thinking was not well established at the time so religions are based on emotions, inspiration and common sense all faster processing centers with minimal knowledge needed.

Logic or rational thinking works slower and required knowledge. It took us many years to build a reliable knowledge base so that we could have valuable rational thinking. Language was first, then writing and today computers.

In today's world you mind is still a battle ground for emotional and logical thinking the 2 do not work well together. When you are deeply in love or Extremely mad how well can you use logic how often do you not. When you are working on a logical problem how much do you notice your needs(like hunger) or the needs of those around you.

Most religions of today are tied heavily to emotional thinking. Love, Hate, Fear, sadness, euphoria and such sometimes in absolutes as Gods love is absolute. This limits their ability to rationalize(logical thinking). They can but it is harder. They must separate from the emotional side of religion to have success at rational thinking.

But both types of thought have served us well and why should one be chosen over the other. Evolution has equipped us with both for a reason. The best bet is probably to balance both types of thought.

Can a religion be based on rational thinking of course it could; however, I doubt they would ever allow it to be called a religion because by definition religion implies belief.

 

[LuisDantas]

Rationality isn't reassuring for many people. I feel that to be the core matter to address far as the OP is concerned.

There is a very unhealthy, even outright blasphemous and profane co-morbidity between the temptation of faith towards embracing unchecked fantasy and social control techniques in order to corrupt itself out of confort and the tendency of many people to simply embrace escapism in order to avoid hurtful realizations.

TL;DR - Many people call "religion" activities and even whole denominations whose whole reason for being is actually to shamelessly be irrational and alienated, to the point that the word "religion" itself has been tainted in many people's perceptions.

It would help if people learned to accept their duty to care for religion by refusing to deny the existence of its shortcomings and degenerations, instead of just insisting that they are inexistent or irrelevant and hoping that to be enough. But when for so many people the appeal of religion is exactly avoiding such painful realizations it is difficult to avoid a self-feeding downwards spiral.

Many groups that insist in calling themselves "religious" and even on demanding special treatment for that reason are IMO just gigantic, tragic jokes of a very dubious taste that are rapidly bringing ruin to their own adherents and to others that fail to point out their flaws, mostly by proudly insisting on eschewing rationality altogether - or even worse, by lying even more proudly about what rationality is. Those supposedly religious groups are a cancer growing inside society, and attaining ever growing political influence. They must be challenged relentlessly, fiercely, until they end up being no more - and most of all, they must be challenged internally, by religious people, of either own faith if at all possible.

But that is so because those are all-out degenerations, well-established and unfairly respected as they are.

Proper religion actually needs rationality and should greatly value it, mainly because it is one of humanity's most useful and precious gifts. Doctrine and its popular interpretations may or may not allow or encourage the formation of rational groups of practice within religious groups, and the degree to which they do may vary a lot. At least three come immediately to mind that are very diverse from each other and very influential in various ways, yet seem to make a point of being irrational for irrationality's sake.

But we also find groups that allow themselves to engage in constructive reciprocal encouragement and expression of their best moral traits - and true morality has rationality as its very lifeblood.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm sure you can work that out.

That is a foolish stance for one to take, among other reasons because it is all but certain to be mistaken.

 

[LuisDantas]

Well I'm not really sure how to do address this without knowing what parts of religion you find irrational.
If it's the whole of religion itself, I'd like to point out that irreligion is no more rational than religion.

Don't you want to at least try to address the question?

 

[Riverwolf]

I'd say because rationality is not the purpose of religious customs, nor is rationality the be-all-end-all of universal human existence.

Religion is more of a social, expressive, and emotional matter, and as such often has elements that can seem irrational. I don't really see this as an inherently problematic thing, unless Lore starts being interpreted as hard fact that runs contrary to direct observation and experience.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm sure you can work that out.

I'll take that as meaning it's not important enough to work out.

 

[Augustus]

Well I'm not really sure how to do address this without knowing what parts of religion you find irrational.

This is important to be able to answer the question, imo.

As for 'evidence based', for a non-theist, religions developed over time and are a product of human experience. Experience is perfectly valid evidence of what works and what doesn't. Many teachings should therefore be seen as rational responses to human experience (at least at the time they were written).

Of course there is plenty of religious content that could fairly be describes as irrational too, but are religions really that irrational overall? The teaching is often rational, even when the parable or figurative imagery isn't.

As to whether they become more rational over time, we add to them and modify them according to additional evidence as our experiences and environment evolve. Religions become more rational for today's society when they are altered to fit new realities; if you took modern religion back 2000 years in a time machine, it could possibly be less rational.

It would not be rational to assume a religion has been perfected for all time and all situations with a single, inflexible, literal 'truth'.

 

[oldbadger]

Don't you want to at least try to address the question?

Hi Luis....
Let me try? Here is my premise.....
Beyond the laws of Nature, (which humans try to rise above or distance themselves from) nothing about humans is rational. If so, then 'Why would their religions be rational?'
Now........ can you smash the above premise?
All you have to do is tell me about something which humans have done (beyond the laws of Nature, such as getting warm, eating, reproducing etc) which has been rational.

Off hand......... I cannot think of anything (beyond Nature's laws/demands)

What do you think?

 

[Sunstone]

Don't you want to at least try to address the question?

Please don't encourage her to pollute my thread. I'm trying to have a serious discussion here.

 

[Sunstone]

This is important to be able to answer the question, imo.

I disagree. It's pretty much a threshold requirement for meaningful participation in this thread that posters are themselves rational enough, and intellectually honest enough, to be able to identify on their own at least some areas of some religions that are irrational. I do not wish this thread to be diverted into answering the more trivial question, "Are religions ever irrational".

 

[Sunstone]

Kinda like art. Religion has to be a passionate art form, more than just a dry set of instructions. Inspiration and creativity need more than rationality. Maybe the deepest lust of life also.

Thank you so much for that response! It's fascinating!

 

[LuisDantas]

Hi Luis....
Let me try? Here is my premise.....
Beyond the laws of Nature, (which humans try to rise above or distance themselves from) nothing about humans is rational. If so, then 'Why would their religions be rational?'
Now........ can you smash the above premise?

What exactly is meant by "nothing about humans is rational" there? For that matter, how are laws of nature an exception anyway?

I don't think I follow you.