The Faith & Religion mega Thread

O unless smart-ish and don't have any... ��

Originally Posted by Pastychomper It's nice to see that China still officially* has freedom of belief for the country as whole. Its ruling Party is officially atheist (and requires its members to be), and is plagued with corruption, hence my questions. China itself is perceived to be more corrupt than any of the countries mentioned by nigelc. *How much freedom of belief the Chinese actually have is a matter of some debate.

I might be wrong, and missing some nuances of totalitarian regimes, but it sounds like a mere public relations trick to me, probably directed to foreign countries more than Chinese citizens. In a regime constitutionally represented by a single party which, to say the least, doesn't recognize human rights and the rule of law, I have very strong doubts regarding the real extent of any declared freedom of belief, which in fact seems to be limited to religious groups controlled by the party (and even there, with limitations). On the other hand, the fact that atheism is forced on party officials simply suggests that atheism is the official religion, no matter if there's no god whatsoever in it.

How much freedom of belief do Uighur Muslims have in China?

Originally Posted by hazel How much freedom of belief do Uighur Muslims have in China?

What's happening in Xinjiang is disgusting and concerning. I also suspect that it is not much different from the secret dreams of some Western leaders and government officials. The more we surrender our democratic rights to fearmongering trolls, the more probably something like that might happen (again) closer to us.

If you have kids you're a socialist dictator but racisms\borders are not things.

You could say " OH Grow Up!" but every 200 years things change so drastically none of us really are...

I've read and explored several religions and obviously, I got to know one thing that non of religion inspires people to do bad things..But people have added theories and laws to the core of religion from time to time to get personal and cultural benefits. And also I saw that some core conceptions has been taken wrongly and misconceptions have been transferred generation to generation

Originally Posted by VeraP I've read and explored several religions and obviously, I got to know one thing that non of religion inspires people to do bad things..But people have added theories and laws to the core of religion from time to time to get personal and cultural benefits. And also I saw that some core conceptions has been taken wrongly and misconceptions have been transferred generation to generation

That is a valid point and I don't think anyone, even the so-called "aggressive atheists" typified by Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, maintains that any religions are intrinsically evil or openly promote evil deeds, at least once they advanced far enough to eschew human sacrifice except symbolically. AFAIK most atheists see value in the abolition of organized religion or at least the ongoing progression of reduction of areas of influence where Science and Logic are provably more accurate and effective at providing answers and the reduction of the "Group Think" and Evangelism that so easily can morph into "Mob Rule" that has so often resulted in Crusades, Inquisitions, Fatwahs... all that "Other as Infidel" justification for maltreatment, ostracism and even torture and murder that is the "bad things" we can do better without.

Originally Posted by enorbet I don't think anyone, even the so-called "aggressive atheists" typified by Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, maintains that any religions are intrinsically evil or openly promote evil deeds, at least once they advanced far enough to eschew human sacrifice except symbolically.

Sam Harris, at least, does maintain that:

https://samharris.org/the-sacrifice-of-reason/

Originally Posted by Sam Harris Christianity amounts to the claim that we must love and be loved by a God who approves of the scapegoating, torture, and murder of one man—his son, incidentally—in compensation for the misbehavior and thought-crimes of all others.

https://samharris.org/gods-hostages/

Originally Posted by Sam Harris For millennia, the world’s great prophets and theologians have applied their collective genius to the riddle of womanhood. The result has been polygamy, sati, honor killing, punitive rape, genital mutilation, forced marriages, a cultic obsession with virginity, compulsory veiling, the persecution of unwed mothers, and other forms of physical and psychological abuse so kaleidoscopic in variety as to scarcely admit of concise description. Some of this sexist evil probably predates religion and can be ascribed to our biology, but there is no question that religion promulgates and renders sacrosanct attitudes toward women that would be unseemly in a brachiating ape.

https://samharris.org/the-end-of-liberalism/

Originally Posted by Sam Harris I argued that the world’s major religions are genuinely incompatible, inevitably cause conflict and now prevent the emergence of a viable, global civilization.

True, ntubski, and I happen to agree with him, but I don't see the above quotes as describing Religion as intrinsically evil, just rigid and therefore backward... continuing to root us in the crude, often brutal, superstitious past, not adapting and changing with new evidence as Science does. Naturally that is a scientist's framework and point of view.

Also, while Sam Harris makes some references to other religions he, like me, tend to interpret Religion as Christianity since our experiences are longest and deepest with that particular form. We try to be inclusive but we have only "the Readers Digest" degree of experience in the other forms. What is intrinsic to Religion is Dogma and a dose of Authoritarianism and while that certainly creates and sustains a kind of general negativity that does indeed hold back real progress, it isn't exactly evil on it's own. As VeraP pointed out, that is usually brought about by some individual(s) interpretation and extension. Science only reduces that sort of occurrence since it does get dogmatic at times, and like religion especially among certain individuals and institutions. In Science there are champions and we may have to "beat the Champ" but at least evidence is the ultimate Champ and not some Divine Right concept or person. It can be very difficult to unseat popular concepts but it can be done and though a small step it is in the right direction in my view.

Additionally if we look at the Net effect, religions have served a purpose and done a great deal of good so the balance sheet, though a bit fuzzy, seems to be at worst, neutral. I am a very intrigued by the writings of Alvin Toffler, author of Future Shock, Third Wave, Powershift: Knowledge, Wealth and Violence at the Edge of the 21st Century and many other books, but especially Third Wave since it describes our times from the perspective of long term paradigm shifts just as from Hunter/Gatherer to Agricultural and Agricultural to Industrial. We are in a deep transition period and they have always been a bit chaotic and often catastrophic. In a modern world of nearly 8,000,000,000 humans I find it rather amazing that any of us still has any sense of individuality but I certainly hope that not only continues but flourishes and powerfully changes Organized Religions to a more individual basis to strip it's power to shape thought, morality and especially politics.

Originally Posted by enorbet I don't see the above quotes as describing Religion as intrinsically evil

I don't think I understand what exactly you mean by "intrinsically evil" then.

while Sam Harris makes some references to other religions he, like me, tend to interpret Religion as Christianity

He's definitely said a lot about Islam too, he's somewhat notorious for it. I didn't post an example quote, because the discussion around it tends to be more noisy and lose the actual point. AFAIK, the only religion he has something good to say about is Buddhism, https://samharris.org/killing-the-buddha/

Originally Posted by Sam Harris In many respects, Buddhism is very much like science. One starts with the hypothesis that using attention in the prescribed way (meditation), and engaging in or avoiding certain behaviors (ethics), will bear the promised result (wisdom and psychological well-being). This spirit of empiricism animates Buddhism to a unique degree. For this reason, the methodology of Buddhism, if shorn of its religious encumbrances, could be one of our greatest resources as we struggle to develop our scientific understanding of human subjectivity.

Originally Posted by ntubski I don't think I understand what exactly you mean by "intrinsically evil" then.

I'm referring to the intent in the design. For example a carpenter's claw hammer was designed specifically to pound in and remove nails in order to build useful things but they have also been (mis)used as a weapon. That doesn't make hammers intrinsically evil. I don't know of any modern religion that by design promotes theft, murder, etc. Then when we consider application of the precepts to ascertain net effect, it's probably safe to say that at the very least directly, most religions have done more good than evil. Though that is nearly impossible to prove, I'm willing to give them that much. It's just my opinion that they have outlived their usefulness and value... value that can be achieved by other means without all the "stuck in the past" sanctimonious "Chosen Ones" baggage that so easily leads to intolerance and overbearing, sometimes knowingly deceitful, influence.

Originally Posted by ntubski He's definitely said a lot about Islam too, he's somewhat notorious for it. I didn't post an example quote, because the discussion around it tends to be more noisy and lose the actual point. AFAIK, the only religion he has something good to say about is Buddhism, https://samharris.org/killing-the-buddha/

Yes but that is largely because it became topical when some of Islam's aggressive members jumped borders and attacked citizens of non-Muslim countries. Most people didn't think much about Islam while they were just executing their own. That Mr. Harris has said a lot about Islam doesn't mean he's studied it let alone lived in it. He's just aware it can be particularly medieval and authoritarian like most non-Muslims are now aware. My point was simply that few of us know much of anything about religions in terms of what it is like to live under their influence, especially those of us from civilizations that believe in separation of Church and State, however little that is actually practiced.

Originally Posted by enorbet I'm referring to the intent in the design.

Most religions don't come with design notes. At any rate, I think present-day religions (excepting some cults) are all accumulations of many people's inputs, so any singular intent tends to get very diluted.

Would you consider "take over the world" as an evil goal? That is surely at least one intent embedded in proselytizing religions. But perhaps taking over the world is only evil when supervillains do it (e.g., the idea of "democracy" taking over the world doesn't seem too alarming (at least in general)).

Book smarts aren't actively teaching anyone! My instinct is we're not learning until they burn, again and again... if you own a book shoot your self in the face with it! Freedummies.

Originally Posted by jamison20000e Book smarts aren't actively teaching anyone! My instinct is we're not learning until they burn, again and again... if you own a book shoot your self in the face with it! Freedummies.

I certainly hope this is supposed to be some dark joke.