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.
Aristotle was for a lot of things, so not into negativities and restrictions. Many of the Greek were about expanding capabilities and considerations; broadening one's abilities and horizons. They put a high value and priority on quality life.
Plato talked about the soul and higher matters. It's all good. No problem or issue to waste time on fabricating.
From my understanding he was against religion however he believe it was good for society. But why?>
IMO probably because it tends to provide a behavioral social construct, which if followed, (not just selectively, especially by the leaders who wish to assert control) - usually benefits people 'socially' by providing a social structure and hierarchy with human group survival and improvement in mind. I surmise from his position in the society of his day he had exposure to many of the different classes of people of varying educational and cognitive levels through his learning and teaching and likely thought it provided some manner of social self control. So, if he was exposed to religions that sought human welfare, improvement and advancement he likely saw value in those.
You might find John Reigstad's book The Logic of God of interest. He talks about the Aristotlean approach to respect enlightened Pluralism. The affirmation of your own religious tradition and the tradition of your ancestors while remaining sympathetic to the PEACEFUL traditions of others.
From my understanding he was against religion however he believe it was good for society. But why?>
Out of curiosity, what was "religion" like in Aristotle's time? Was it the in your face (convert or die/go to hell) mentality of fundamentalist Muslims and Christians? I would assume no, but I'm curious on how the definition and practices of religion have changed in the last ~2500 years.
On the surface I tend to agree that religion is good for society. Aside from the fundamentalists I think in general all religions have a focus on doing good and loving your neighbor.
Institutionalized religion was always a tool of the ruling class and their hangers on to keep the unwashed masses in line and obedient. After all those in power had a mandate from God. Philosophers may have disagreed but might incur the wrath of their earthly masters.
Religion can be seen as a path to live in a civil society, socialize, etc. Some religions may have an influence on good dietary habits. It can be a path to healthy social habits. I am an atheist, but I see the value in some religious practices. (Dunno about Aristotle though!)
Religion can be seen as a path to live in a civil society, socialize, etc. Some religions may have an influence on good dietary habits. It can be a path to healthy social habits. I am an atheist, but I see the value in some religious practices. (Dunno about Aristotle though!)
See but that’s also where many of the problems come from, especially the part about civil society. If a person requires religion to codify behaviour, then it becomes questionable whether they genuinely adhere to ethics or whether divine punishment plays a role in their attitude.
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.
