Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is not clear why people wound automatically be better at science if there was no religion. That is its not clear how the existence of religion in a culture reduces in some way the aggregate intelligence in the population.
Also, religion is rather general. The distinction between a religious society and say a secular society is not that cut and dry particularly from a functional perspective.
I agree to a certain extent with this caveat- people and societies better at science are less likely to be religious. I think most of these posts are putting the cart before the horse- it is the rational/scientific approach and wealth of a society that leads to less religon. As far as the Soviet Union goes- communism is a form of religon. It's just the substitution of the STATE or LEADER for god and a belief based on faith that an unsustainable system can work.
1. I'd like to see the quantified evidence for this one. I do not see the correlation. Interestingly enough, my daughter attends public school in a town that's not particularly religious, she believes in God, and she's usually the top science student in her class, if not her entire grade. It's her favorite subject, and one she intends to pursue passionately for a career (particularly in the archaeological and anthropological fields).
In the spirit of being open-minded, the only potential benefits I can see are:
(1) People, on average, might be more inclined to live for today, to fully enjoy the present, if they thought this was all that there was.
(2) None of us would ever again have to hear: "You're going to burn in hell because you don't agree with me on this!" Though I suppose, there will just be some other dire threat to replace it.
I agree with you on that the absence of religion does not automatically make you good at science. Granted that many atheists and agnostics are bright people and know a fair deal about science, this may only because it is not the norm. Personally, I think that atheists tend to try and learn as much about the world in all aspects simply because they are seeking knowledge. (And I am in no way saying that if you're religious you can't be smart ).
(1) People might be more inclined to live for today in a fufilling way, but that might become a bad thing because some people will think "This is all that there is, so what does it matter if I rob that bank?".
(2) That would certainly be a nice phrase to talk out of daily speech on Earth.
A lot of people need to be controlled by fear. Most of the societies without religon are well-educated and wealthy to begin with (i.e. it is likely the nature of the rational society that led to less religon as opposed to the lack of religon that lead to more rational society). I'm not sure the lack of religon is a good thing in undereducated poor societies.
I completely disagree with your point of view. Would you like to be in a society controlled by fear? I know I wouldn't. I also thought that ChristieCT made a good point concerning societies that were officially atheist. They were complete economic basket cases and failed in every way and they oppressed their society. When anything is taken to an extreme it can become destructive including the abolition of religion. I think that most western nations, including the US, have taken the right approach, people have certain rights and they certainly have the right to their own personal beliefs and shouldn't have to sneak around and try to conceal their beliefs when they try to associate with like minded individuals while trying to hide that behavior from the government.
I completely disagree with your point of view. Would you like to be in a society controlled by fear? I know I wouldn't. I also thought that ChristieCT made a good point concerning societies that were officially atheist. They were complete economic basket cases and failed in every way and they oppressed their society. When anything is taken to an extreme it can become destructive including the abolition of religion. I think that most western nations, including the US, have taken the right approach, people have certain rights and they certainly have the right to their own personal beliefs and shouldn't have to sneak around and try to conceal their beliefs when they try to associate with like minded individuals while trying to hide that behavior from the government.
Officially atheist societies were religious- they believed in an economic system based on faith and believed in a leader/the state based on faith. Areas like Sweden, Norway, and most of Europe now are not religious for the most part BECAUSE they are rational. What I meant wasn't for societies official positions- I'm talking about individuals. There are a lot of people, unfortunately, that will not do good things unless they beleive that a supernatural power will reward/punish them. For those people, mind control by the brainwashing of religon isn't necessarily a bad thing. in no way was I suggesting that it be used as our form of government.
IAs far as the Soviet Union goes- communism is a form of religon. It's just the substitution of the STATE or LEADER for god and a belief based on faith that an unsustainable system can work.
If you are going to consider communism a religion than you're going to have a really hard time arguing that the scientific community is not religious. Communism is just a particular economic theory and pure communism really has no leaders. The USSR was founded on Leninism which was letter refined. Suggesting that communism was based on faith is rather inane, have you read Das Kapital? Communism is no more based on faith than Capitalism.
But I get it, when bad things happen under the role of atheistic influence its "because it was a religion" and when it happens under religious influence its "because it was a religion".
Having a "leader" is not a necessary or sufficient condition for being a religion.
I agree with you on that the absence of religion does not automatically make you good at science. Granted that many atheists and agnostics are bright people and know a fair deal about science, this may only because it is not the norm. Personally, I think that atheists tend to try and learn as much about the world in all aspects simply because they are seeking knowledge. (And I am in no way saying that if you're religious you can't be smart ).
(1) People might be more inclined to live for today in a fufilling way, but that might become a bad thing because some people will think "This is all that there is, so what does it matter if I rob that bank?".
(2) That would certainly be a nice phrase to talk out of daily speech on Earth.
I completely agree with everything you just posted.
Officially atheist societies were religious- they believed in an economic system based on faith and believed in a leader/the state based on faith. Areas like Sweden, Norway, and most of Europe now are not religious for the most part BECAUSE they are rational. What I meant wasn't for societies official positions- I'm talking about individuals. There are a lot of people, unfortunately, that will not do good things unless they beleive that a supernatural power will reward/punish them. For those people, mind control by the brainwashing of religon isn't necessarily a bad thing. in no way was I suggesting that it be used as our form of government.
I don't agree that communism is a religion in the vein that the OP was referring to, but I do see your logic and, based on some lesser used definitions of the word "religion", you could definitely draw the parallel.
I only brought up communism as an example of a society where the majority of the population was atheist (I believe during Stalin's time, the stat was roughly between 60% and 70%, but I'd have to look it up to verify). A lot of the same problems you find in a religious society also manifest in an atheist one--they just might manifest in different ways.
Basically, what I'm saying is that religion is not the cause of the world's problems. Religion, government, society--these are things we use in an attempt to tame the worst aspects of human nature while encouraging its best aspects, albeit with limited success. In fact, when any of the three begin to reign unchecked, they cause more problems than they solve--which is why we must be diligent in keeping them from gaining too much power over individual lives. I don't, however, believe removing any one of those three entirely will solve humanity's problems.
I do, however, believe that too much of any of those three will certainly increase humanity's problems.
Last edited by ChristieCT; 04-28-2009 at 07:47 PM..
If you are going to consider communism a religion than you're going to have a really hard time arguing that the scientific community is not religious. Communism is just a particular economic theory and pure communism really has no leaders. The USSR was founded on Leninism which was letter refined. Suggesting that communism was based on faith is rather inane, have you read Das Kapital? Communism is no more based on faith than Capitalism.
But I get it, when bad things happen under the role of atheistic influence its "because it was a religion" and when it happens under religious influence its "because it was a religion".
Having a "leader" is not a necessary or sufficient condition for being a religion.
I agree with what you're saying, but I think what JakeDog was saying is that, because communism is a quantifiably unsustainable system, the people were adhering to it based on faith in those in power, or in the better intentions of men's hearts. They were basing their allegiance on faith instead of reason, much like many people of a religious persuasion do. Whereas science involves repeatable, quantifiable methods of theorizing, testing, and proving/disproving before putting anything into action/law/etc, so no faith is required.
If I've misstated anything, or misunderstood, please let me know--I'm just trying to clear the lines of communication, so to speak!
I agree with what you're saying, but I think what JakeDog was saying is that, because communism is a quantifiably unsustainable system, the people were adhering to it based on faith in those in power, or in the better intentions of men's hearts.
In what way is "communism quantifiably unsustainable system"? I don't agree with this claim at all. In fact its pretty ironic since Marx argued that Capitalism was unsustainable! Incidentally, at the moment Capitalism is not looking all that good.
If you are going to suggest it was based on faith because people had "faith in those in power" then every civilization is based on faith!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristieCT
They were basing their allegiance on faith instead of reason, much like many people of a religious persuasion do.
Rubbish. Das Kapital and a number of other books argue for and lay out a foundation for Communism. And again if you are talking about the masses believing it on faith rather than reason, then the same can be said of every society on the planet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristieCT
Whereas science involves repeatable, quantifiable methods of theorizing, testing, and proving/disproving before putting anything into action/law/etc, so no faith is required.
Except that the masses do not understand the methods, the theorizing, etc and therefore believe on faith.
Also, just to note. A communist society is intended to be stateless, so the talk of leaders shows a basic misunderstanding of communism. Leninism and later Stalinism are not identical to communism, rather they were derved from it. But in both cases they were based on reasoned arguments, not faith or irrational impulses.
Anyhow, Americans tend to have a rather backward idea of what communism is all about, but its only natural. The education system is filled with political propaganda. But Communism like the foundation of American style democracy was created from a rich intellectual history.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
).
