Why is there religion???


BaalChatzaf

Recommended Posts

Why is there religion??? It goes against rationality. It collides with fact. It causes otherwise normal people to be and do the dreadful. But it has always been with mankind, ever since when, most likely even before our race settled down and operated in agricultural mode.

It has existed in every kith, kin and tribe. In every language, culture and nation. It defies reason, yet it persists.

Why?????

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 405
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Why is there religion??? It goes against rationality. It collides with fact. It causes otherwise normal people to be and do the dreadful. But it has always been with mankind, ever since when, most likely even before our race settled down and operated in agricultural mode.

It has existed in every kith, kin and tribe. In every language, culture and nation. It defies reason, yet it persists.

Why?????

Ba'al Chatzaf

Must be rational. Rand called it primitive philosophy. Hence rational as such, speaking basically. It's a way of controlling people or part of the method of political power. State-religious convergence has been much the norm. The Church of England is basically Catholic without the Pope and is-was(?) the state religion of Great Britain. Christianity conquered the Roman Empire then it ruled it. Most people have a psychological need for it and its explanations of the unknowable.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is there religion??? It goes against rationality. It collides with fact. It causes otherwise normal people to be and do the dreadful. But it has always been with mankind, ever since when, most likely even before our race settled down and operated in agricultural mode.

It has existed in every kith, kin and tribe. In every language, culture and nation. It defies reason, yet it persists.

Why?????

Ba'al Chatzaf

Must be rational. Rand called it primitive philosophy. Hence rational as such, speaking basically. It's a way of controlling people or part of the method of political power. State-religious convergence has been much the norm. The Church of England is basically Catholic without the Pope and is-was(?) the state religion of Great Britain. Christianity conquered the Roman Empire then it ruled it. Most people have a psychological need for it and its explanations of the unknowable.

--Brant

Indeed. but why? And how do we get rid of the need?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is there religion??? It goes against rationality. It collides with fact. It causes otherwise normal people to be and do the dreadful. But it has always been with mankind, ever since when, most likely even before our race settled down and operated in agricultural mode.

It has existed in every kith, kin and tribe. In every language, culture and nation. It defies reason, yet it persists.

Why?????

Ba'al Chatzaf

Must be rational. Rand called it primitive philosophy. Hence rational as such, speaking basically. It's a way of controlling people or part of the method of political power. State-religious convergence has been much the norm. The Church of England is basically Catholic without the Pope and is-was(?) the state religion of Great Britain. Christianity conquered the Roman Empire then it ruled it. Most people have a psychological need for it and its explanations of the unknowable.

--Brant

Indeed. but why? And how do we get rid of the need?

Ba'al Chatzaf

As an Aspie I doubt if you can find the answer through introspection. My impression is it comes first from the need to be with others and then from the need to embrace a larger reality beyond the one directly experienced. The desire to remain as children may play a role with "God" the constant Daddy. This can be expressed secularly perhaps through the welfare state or even "crony Capitalism" and such dependency.

--Brant

the human race is slowly growing up--very slowly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an Aspie I doubt if you can find the answer through introspection. My impression is it comes first from the need to be with others and then from the need to embrace a larger reality beyond the one directly experienced. The desire to remain as children may play a role with "God" the constant Daddy. This can be expressed secularly perhaps through the welfare state or even "crony Capitalism" and such dependency.

--Brant

the human race is slowly growing up--very slowly

That is as good a response as I have seen to the question. Very insightful. And I think you are right. A person would have to be neuro-typical to comprehend that need. Ironically, my adherence to Judaism is primarily because of its ethical excellence. That is the only part of Judaism that really makes sense to me.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is there religion??? It goes against rationality. It collides with fact. It causes otherwise normal people to be and do the dreadful. But it has always been with mankind, ever since when, most likely even before our race settled down and operated in agricultural mode.

It has existed in every kith, kin and tribe. In every language, culture and nation. It defies reason, yet it persists.

Why?????

Ba'al Chatzaf

I can offer a guess or hypothesis or theory, whatever word best fits. Two reasons, both together.

1. Maybe as Ayn Rand says there is a need for philosophy.

2. But philosophy, real philosophy as opposed to religion, requires thinking. For many people, perhaps most people, thinking is hard work. And perhaps many people don't do it very well. Believing is easier than thinking. Why bother thinking when a. it is hard work, b. can't do it anyway, c. don't need to because the priest or the guru or the great philosopher tells you what to believe?

Altho man is defined as the animal with the faculty of reason and altho man lives by reason, if you took away all the geniuses, man would be in bad shape. Without the geniuses, there would be no science and no technology. The non-genius faculty of reason would not be enough for man to live a good life, perhaps not enough to survive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Religion was invented because no-one wants to die. Monotheism solves an otherwise unsolvable problem of super-massive import. When reason was invented in 600 BC, life became remarkably good and great -- amazingly sweet and pleasurable for the rational. Death, in turn, became unusually painful and awful. So man created "god" in order to live forever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Religion was invented because no-one wants to die. Monotheism solves an otherwise unsolvable problem of super-massive import. When reason was invented in 600 BC, life became remarkably good and great -- amazingly sweet and pleasurable for the rational. Death, in turn, became unusually painful and awful. So man created "god" in order to live forever.

I disagree with your third sentence. Life became different. We cannot so well know the rest you posit. Civilization came out of agriculture and the creation of surpluses all of which pre-date 600 BC. Are you talking about 1000 or 1,000,000 or what? The smaller the number the closer you likely are to the truth, but the more trivial that becomes.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Religion was invented because no-one wants to die. Monotheism solves an otherwise unsolvable problem of super-massive import. When reason was invented in 600 BC, life became remarkably good and great -- amazingly sweet and pleasurable for the rational. Death, in turn, became unusually painful and awful. So man created "god" in order to live forever.

Structured thinking is part and parcel of language. Aristotle did not -invent- logic, he provided a systematic description of it, partially in lingustic terms. When Mankind acquired grammar it acquired the ability to think systematically. Which is no guarantee of truth. Socrates used logic in The Meno and Plato used logic in Theatatus. It was nonsense on stilts but it was logical nonsense on stilts.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monotheistic religion is an epistemological triangle formed by joining in one's mind three points of oneself, reality and God. God isn't just a father substitute or justification for partriarchy. It's using an imaginary existential force to create perseverance and power in oneself through an all powerful ally. One (made in His own image) takes one's own power and projects it onto God where it is magnified and returned. Much more powerful than a Randian hero, but the principle is the same. "God" is pure, collective psychological genius. If you want to you can talk to him and he'll talk back and tell you what you know is true because you already know it. You just didn't know you knew it before the conversation. The God out there is only the God in you.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant wrote:

My impression is it comes first from the need to be with others and then from the need to embrace a larger reality beyond the one directly experienced.

end quote

That is approximately my opinion. But then something horrible can occur and people start using their beliefs for exclusion and intolerance and even violence. A recent commentator, talking about ISIS thought it was a political but not necessarily a religious movement. So, why does so much violence and force stem from religion?

My wife is reading her second book about the Amish. The paper reported lessened prison sentences for some Amish thugs who were cutting the hair and beards of Amish men who were slightly different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Good to see a lot of the same folks here. After taking a hiatus (we adopted 2 adolescent sisters from Russia 3 years ago and have been busy with them and my other kids)  I have a bit of time to pursue other interests.  

My thoughts, as a Christian, on the question posed by Ba'al.  

Why is there religion?  I'd say religion resulted from man using his faculties of reason and rationale.  Presuming an evolutionary emergence of man and intelligence, man observed the world around him as well as cause and effect, e.g., lightning hits a tree and the tree bursts into fire, he bangs his finger and experiences pain, etc.  He also observes the world around him and sees trees, plants, animals, etc., and reasons that the existence of himself and the world must have had a cause, but what/who caused it?  Given the design of the world around him, e.g., the way plants grow, the weather, the seasons, etc., the use of reason would have him to posit that a mind or some intelligence was involved. But who/what is that mind?  Reason would also have to posit an uncaused first cause to avoid a reduction problem.

Aristotle saw the necessity of the Prime Mover, but limited the attributes to that of a metaphysical explanation to the existence of the universe. Even primitive animists held to a view of an immaterial aspect of existence, i.e., the soul. Nor do all religions teach of an afterlife, as Zanton implies.  SO that can't be the reason.

So, the what/why of the surrounding world prompts further thought into this arena.  If there is a prime mover, who might that be?  Is it  person or an impersonal force?  If it is a person of some sort, would it reveal itself and how would it do that?  Positing there was a prime mover that created the universe, then what was its purpose for doing so?  Given man is the only creature with the ability to reason in depth, why do we have this faculty?  What was the prime mover's purpose in granting man the ability to reason? Does he/it want a relationship with man?  Are we accountable in any way?  And so on.  

Answering these reasonable questions requires thought. Numerous theological treatises, flawed as they may be, continue to be studied and developed by intelligent people.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On February 27, 2015 at 1:45 PM, BaalChatzaf said:

Why is there religion??? It goes against rationality. It collides with fact. It causes otherwise normal people to be and do the dreadful. But it has always been with mankind, ever since when, most likely even before our race settled down and operated in agricultural mode.

It has existed in every kith, kin and tribe. In every language, culture and nation. It defies reason, yet it persists.

Why?????

Ba'al Chatzaf

Why is there religion?  I'd say religion resulted from man using his faculties of reason and rationale.  Presuming an evolutionary emergence of man and intelligence, man observed the world around him including things like cause and effect, e.g., lightning hits a tree and the tree bursts into fire, he bangs his finger and experiences pain, etc.  He also observes the world around him and sees trees, plants, animals, etc., and reasons that the existence of himself and the world must have had a cause, but what/who caused it?  Given the design of the world around him, e.g., the way plants grow and feed man and animal, the weather, the seasons, etc., would point to purpose. The use of reason would have him to posit the possibility that a mind or some intelligence was involved. But who/what is that mind?  

Reason would also have to posit the possibility of an uncaused first cause to avoid a reduction problem. Aristotle saw the necessity of the Prime Mover, but limited the attributes to that of a metaphysical explanation to the existence of the universe. Primitive animists held to a view of an immaterial aspect of man's and other creature's existence, i.e., the soul.

Not all religions teach of an afterlife, as Zanton implies.  So, that can't be the reason.

So, the what/why of the surrounding world prompts further thought into this arena.  If there is a prime mover, who might that be?  Is it  person or an impersonal force?  If it is a person of some sort, would it reveal itself and how would it do that?  Positing there was a prime mover that created the universe, then what was its purpose for doing so?  Given man is the only creature with the ability to reason in depth, why do we have this faculty?  What was the prime mover's purpose in granting man the ability to reason? Does he/it want a relationship with man?  Are we accountable in any way?  And so on.  

These are reasonable questions and answering them requires thought. Numerous theological treatises, flawed as they may be, continue to be studied and developed by intelligent people.  

I think that answers the thoughtful question,"Why is there religion" posed by Ba'al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/27/2015 at 11:45 AM, BaalChatzaf said:

Why is there religion??? It goes against rationality. It collides with fact. It causes otherwise normal people to be and do the dreadful. But it has always been with mankind, ever since when, most likely even before our race settled down and operated in agricultural mode.

It has existed in every kith, kin and tribe. In every language, culture and nation. It defies reason, yet it persists.

Why?????

Ba'al Chatzaf

To protect the herd from people like you.

--Brant

and to keep the herd together: religion is the sheep dog, Mr. Wolf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said:

To protect the herd from people like you.

--Brant

and to keep the herd together: religion is the sheep dog, Mr. Wolf

Brant, since I don't know you and your writing style that well, I can't interpret your comment.  Whose herd?  "people like me"?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎29‎/‎2016 at 7:08 AM, Brant Gaede said:

To protect the herd from people like you.

--Brant

and to keep the herd together: religion is the sheep dog, Mr. Wolf

Religion may well be the sheep dog, and Christ is the Shepherd...

...but only of the sheep... not of the goats. :wink:

 

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/29/2016 at 8:19 AM, Mike82ARP said:

Brant, since I don't know you and your writing style that well, I can't interpret your comment.  Whose herd?  "people like me"?   

The "herd" is the non-thinking (very much) go along to get along folk and Bob is the critical, analytical wolf. As part of the herd they're (sorta) safe, especially in their own heads--safe from objectifying their assumed reality.

--Brant

the irony is that Bob doesn't want to eat the sheep, he merely wonders why they aren't wolves too for without the herd they'd be wolves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎1‎/‎2015 at 7:45 AM, zantonavitch said:

Religion provides current comfort and solace regarding the sacred Individual's knowledge of his eventual oblivion.

It's actually secular liberalism that provides current comfort, in that it promotes the nihilism of oblivion as freedom from the consequences of doing evil. Do what thou wilt.

While religion requires the discomfort and discipline of moral accountability to an objective standard of behavior which is greater than ourselves. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Guess which one inspires more people to be decent... and which craps out more smelly immoral turds? :wink: 

 

Greg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Scatology is repeatedly on show here as deepest rationale in Greg’s animadversions. His smudge aside, there’s much good reflection in this thread.

Here is some reflection on the topic from Schopenhauer 1818 (World as Will and Presentation): Among animals, only with the human being does nature “attain for the first time to reflective awareness; it then marvels at its own works and asks itself what it is. But its wonderment is all the more serious as it here stands for the first time consciously face to face with death . . . .

“The interest instilled by philosophical as well as religious systems has its absolutely strongest anchor in the dogma of some form of survival after death. And even if the latter systems seem to make the existence of their gods the main concern, and to defend this with the greatest fervor, it is fundamentally only because they have attached their dogma of immortality to it, and regard it as inseparable from it; this alone is what really matters for them. . . .

“There has never . . . been a lack of people endeavoring to earn their living from this human need for metaphysics and to exploit it as much as possible. That is why it has monopolists and general leaseholders among all peoples: priests. But their trade had everywhere to be secured by obtaining the right to impart their metaphysical dogmas to people at a very early age, before the power of judgment has yet awakened from its morning slumber, hence in earliest childhood, for then every well-implanted dogma, be it ever so senseless, sticks forever. If they had to wait until the power of judgment was mature, then their privileges could not endure.”

In our culture, it has been my experience that when I affirm to a religious person that there is no God (taken as a supernatural god), their concern runs as: if true, then all would be meaningless and we and our loved ones die like a dog. I incline to think Schopenhauer is mostly right on this issue, even though his own metaphysics went quite haywire. (Schopenhauer, by the way, was a serious student of the biology of his day, but he died just before Darwin’s theory appeared.) Schopenhauer studied all kinds of religion (and he comes down extra hard on the Koran), but the kind dominate in his own land would have priests or pastors, along with other trained teachers, educating children in the right beliefs from an early age. In America, those denominations continue, but we have a large contingent of people who go through an intensely emotional episode and ceremony of “being saved” (saved from death mainly). In early childhood, these customers may not have had highly versed priests or pastors, but apparently they had almost always some adults around whom they loved who were of the Christian faith and who were singing its supernatural god and immortality to the children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Implication for further reasons, complicating ones, may be found in this perspective on theism v. atheism in Rand 1936, 1938, and 1943, from draft of my book in progress: [Deleted due to formatting problems.]

So instead, I'll put in this space a little rounding out of Schopenhauer's picture. He writes:

"It is just as absurd to grieve over the time when we will no longer exist as it would be to grieve over the time when we did not yet exist . . . .

"Epicurus considered death from this point of view and therefore quite rightly said, 'death does not concern us', with the elucidation that when we are, death is not, and when death is, we are not. . . . Accordingly, from the standpoint of cognizance there appears to be absolutely no reason for fearing death . . . . And it is actually not this cognizing part of our I that fears death, but rather 'flight from death' proceeds solely from that blind willing with which every living thing is filled." (Translation of D. Carus and R.E. Aquila 2011)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now