Arguments against religion put at stake other social groups

 
 
Avatar
 
 
Antonio1
Total Posts:  6
Joined  04-03-2008
 
 
 
12 May 2009 13:15
 

The arguments used against faith and religion are basically because of the hatred and the evil it causes. Surely religions and faiths have a good part in society, but we can all do good things for ourselves and society without religion. What we must do is to ‘fight’ all social groupings that cause harm to society and religion is a good example.

What I argue is, the same reasons we use to ‘fight’ religion are the same applied to other social groups: eg. Football clubs affiliation. Football clubs are sport activities and they surely have good intention, but they raise hatered and, in many cases, they cause social disturbances between clubs. Many of us are born to become linked to a club and we don’t even argue why. Many times our club is loosing and still we support it. It’s beyond rationality. What I would like to know is if this situation is comparable and if we should treat all these social groupings the same way by condemning them. What makes the difference? (Presuming there is…)

 
 
Avatar
 
 
nv
Total Posts:  2821
Joined  29-04-2005
 
 
 
12 May 2009 14:37
 
Antonio1 - 12 May 2009 05:15 PM

. . .
What I argue is, the same reasons we use to ‘fight’ religion are the same applied to other social groups: eg. Football clubs affiliation. . . . What I would like to know is if this situation is comparable and if we should treat all these social groupings the same way by condemning them. What makes the difference? (Presuming there is…)

You may find the style of a forum such as this to be too self-contained and isolated from actual groups of people to be of use in any fight or struggle, Antonio1. But you might enjoy taking part in attempting to ferret out bullshitters and con artists who arrive ready and willing to take us on. Unfortunately for those who have developed an addiction to such fun, me for instance, few overt bullshitters and con artists stop by any more. Word got out, I suspect.

 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
Argo
Total Posts:  126
Joined  07-05-2008
 
 
 
12 May 2009 16:23
 

What I got from your post Antonio, is that all tribalism can be bad. I agree, I just think all human suffering as a result of sports is minuscule in ratio to the human suffering as a result of beliefs without sufficient evidence.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
SkepticX
Total Posts:  3255
Joined  24-12-2004
 
 
 
12 May 2009 19:01
 
Antonio1 - 12 May 2009 05:15 PM

The arguments used against faith and religion are basically because of the hatred and the evil it causes.


That’s just one side-effect, actually, or a pair I suppose, but I think you’re making the mistake of reifying religion to begin with, and that’s shifting your focus (it’s one of reified Religion’s specialties). Religion isn’t a thing unto itself, it’s just a category of human traits and behaviors and ideologies. We are it, so to speak, or probably more accurate and less obfuscatory, it is part of us. When we consider religion we’re just analyzing human nature, but when we consider Religion (reified) we tend to separate it from us, and that’s when we get the idea it acts upon us rather than that it’s just us acting upon ourselves and each other.

My biggest issue with religion, personally, is that it’s a serious compromise to intellectual integrity, or the integrity of healthy human mental functioning. Religious faith by-passes the bullshit detecting mechanisms by which we understand reality and through religion (dressing up that pure presumption in awe and wonder to look like nobility and virtue) believers give themselves the sense that it’s perfectly okay, even that it makes sense. In fact a basic tenet of at least Western pseudo-monotheism is that it’s the highest virtue, without which humans can’t please God. Ups the stakes so religious faith and religion aren’t questioned. In spite of that believers sure do devote a lot of bullshit rhetoric to obscuring what faith really is! If you consider only what the evidence indicates you get a radically different picture from what you see in the gushing, self-serving, completely abstract and detached apologetics.

Antonio1 - 12 May 2009 05:15 PM

Surely religions and faiths have a good part in society, but we can all do good things for ourselves and society without religion. What we must do is to ‘fight’ all social groupings that cause harm to society and religion is a good example.


Start by separating what’s truly characteristic and definitive of religion from the rhetoric and what’s just normal human social behavior. Then you begin to understand what religion really is and how it really functions.

Antonio1 - 12 May 2009 05:15 PM

What I argue is, the same reasons we use to ‘fight’ religion are the same applied to other social groups: eg. Football clubs affiliation. Football clubs are sport activities and they surely have good intention, but they raise hatered and, in many cases, they cause social disturbances between clubs. Many of us are born to become linked to a club and we don’t even argue why. Many times our club is loosing and still we support it. It’s beyond rationality. What I would like to know is if this situation is comparable and if we should treat all these social groupings the same way by condemning them. What makes the difference? (Presuming there is…)


Football clubs don’t teach, institutionalize and in every way encourage and nurture self-deceptive, obstinate and very often destructive and harmful thinking that its members are expected to proliferate though.

Byron

 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
eudemonia
Total Posts:  2492
Joined  05-04-2008
 
 
 
13 May 2009 06:34
 

My problem with religion is that it is based on self delusion and once a person steps out on that quite slippery slope, almost anything is possible both good and bad.

Keep life real.

Religion may even be good short term for many people, but it’s far reaching affects are bad long term. There is no end to self delusion. It’s one of the most dangerous things fathomable for human beings to partake in.

And history continues to prove this.