Anything good about religion at all?

Kooli

phutyle wrote: »

No doubt there are lots of good things about religion. But I don't think there's anything exclusively good about it. That's to say, I don't think it provides for any merits that could not be (and are not) provided without it. In terms of "good", religion simply isn't necessary. So any good things about it are a fortunate bonus, as opposed to a critical justification for its continued existence.

I'm not sure there is yet a secular replacement for the 'community' role the church plays. A central place where all ages and types are welcomed and can even play an active role. A person who is available for a chat with anyone any time.
Where would the 70 year old with no kids or family find a sense of community?
Where would the African immigrant who knows no one find a sense of community?
Where would the slightly weird but harmless neighbour find a community where he can belong and help out etc?

I'm not saying at all these are justifications for the continued power and presence of the church. Not at all. But I would like to consider what communities might be losing if they do lose the church, and how communities can then respond to their vulnerable members.

endacl

Kooli wrote: »

phutyle wrote: »

No doubt there are lots of good things about religion. But I don't think there's anything exclusively good about it. That's to say, I don't think it provides for any merits that could not be (and are not) provided without it. In terms of "good", religion simply isn't necessary. So any good things about it are a fortunate bonus, as opposed to a critical justification for its continued existence.

I'm not sure there is yet a secular replacement for the 'community' role the church plays. A central place where all ages and types are welcomed and can even play an active role. A person who is available for a chat with anyone any time.
Where would the 70 year old with no kids or family find a sense of community?
Where would the African immigrant who knows no one find a sense of community?
Where would the slightly weird but harmless neighbour find a community where he can belong and help out etc?

I'm not saying at all these are justifications for the continued power and presence of the church. Not at all. But I would like to consider what communities might be losing if they do lose the church, and how communities can then respond to their vulnerable members.

With weekly attendances at mass down to 2% in some parishes, you're really talking about tiny fractions of communities. Or do they organise at the midnight mass each saturnalia? The communal good argument is, for better or worse, largely moot in urban areas. Alive and well out in the shticks, in my experience, but has a lot more to do with neighbourliness and general decency. Which don't require religion.

Gregor Samsa

Kooli wrote: »

I'm not sure there is yet a secular replacement for the 'community' role the church plays. A central place where all ages and types are welcomed and can even play an active role. A person who is available for a chat with anyone any time.
Where would the 70 year old with no kids or family find a sense of community?
Where would the African immigrant who knows no one find a sense of community?
Where would the slightly weird but harmless neighbour find a community where he can belong and help out etc?

I'm not saying at all these are justifications for the continued power and presence of the church. Not at all. But I would like to consider what communities might be losing if they do lose the church, and how communities can then respond to their vulnerable members.

There's hundreds, if not thousands, of sporting and social organizations that can, and do, provide a sense of community to a huge variety of people. I'm sure you'll find some specific people that they won't necessarily work for, but you'll find many people that a church won't work for either. Me, for instance. The notion that "the church" provides something completely universal and irreplaceable is a fiction.

What if that immigrant, "slightly weird but harmless neighbour" or the 70 year old is an atheist? Or even just not particularly interested in religion? The won't really find a community where he can belong in a church, will they? Unless they change their view to become compatible with the church in question. There's no denying that churches provide a sense of community to their members, but there's an assumption in your examples that the type of people you cite are compatible with the community the church in question provides, and I don't think that assumption is valid.

A church provides a community for people who are disposed to its aims and character - just like any other organisation. While this may indeed be good, it's not an exclusive good that can not, or is not, replicated outside of it.

kylith

biko wrote: »

Christmas music

If I were to say that there's a bad side to atheism it's that it's stolen the joy of that music from me. I used to sing in my local church choir until I was 18 (as part of my parents' 'while you live in our house, you'll go to mass' rule). Since leaving the RCC I can no longer bring myself to sing the hymns because they are pretty much uniformly worship/adoration/supplication in theme, and I will not say those words, even in a song.

If I were to pick one good thing about religion it's that it gave Gregor Mendel somewhere that he could work with his peas.

Kooli

phutyle wrote: »

What if that immigrant, "slightly weird but harmless neighbour" or the 70 year old is an atheist? Or even just not particularly interested in religion? The won't really find a community where he can belong in a church, will they? Unless they change their view to become compatible with the church in question. There's no denying that churches provide a sense of community to their members, but there's an assumption in your examples that the type of people you cite are compatible with the community the church in question provides, and I don't think that assumption is valid.

A church provides a community for people who are disposed to its aims and character - just like any other organisation. While this may indeed be good, it's not an exclusive good that can not, or is not, replicated outside of it.

(in bold) yeah that's kind of the point that I was making. I don't think any other organisation has successfully managed to replicated the role a church can play in a community to reduce isolation, reach out to marginalised people and provide a sense of belonging.

I know you're saying it is replicated, and someone else said there are 'thousands' of organisations that do this, but I can't think of one that is as inclusive to different ages, genders, ethnicities, interests.

Gregor Samsa

Kooli wrote: »

I know you're saying it is replicated, and someone else said there are 'thousands' of organisations that do this, but I can't think of one that is as inclusive to different ages, genders, ethnicities, interests.

Any camera club, or GAA club (to give only two examples), is open and inclusive to different ages, genders and ethnicities. The only problematic criteria on the list would be interests, obviously. If you're not into photography, a camera club isn't going to provide you with a sense of community. But that applies to a church too. If you don't share your interests with that of the church, it's not going to be an attractive community to you. So I don't see the difference between the two at that level (there's obviously huge differences at other levels).

I think churches (specifically The Catholic Church in Ireland) is seen as a special case because it's so big, and has historically had such a large role to play in society. It's like some people can't see past it. Yet, many of us successfully live without it quite happily on a daily basis.

You're basically saying that you can't think of an organisation that has as many members as the CC. Maybe that's true (I don't know), but I don't see how it concerns the matter of "goodness" in any qualitative sense.

You describe the church as a place where "all ages and types are welcomed and can even play an active role". And I assume you're specially talking about the Catholic Church. All ages, maybe, but I don't think the church welcomes all types - certainly not as openly as you suggest. There are membership criteria (belief in many things that a lot of people find wholly unacceptable), and huge restrictions on the active participation of women in the organisation, to give just one obvious example. Or try being openly and actively gay in the CC, and see how far the sense of community goes.

Turtwig

phutyle wrote: »

No doubt there are lots of good things about religion. But I don't think there's anything exclusively good about it. That's to say, I don't think it provides for any merits that could not be (and are not) provided without it. In terms of "good", religion simply isn't necessary. So any good things about it are a fortunate bonus, as opposed to a critical justification for its continued existence.

Any study that looked at "happiness" and religion tended to be about how devout church goers were more likely to be happy and satisfied in their lives. One could use that as a weak argument to say religious people are happy and contented more than irreligious people but to make such an argument would be to ignore the fact that people who are able to attend church weekly likely don't have as many issues, for example illness, as people who can't attend it weekly. So really, the only conclusion that can be safely drawn is that people who are content and satisfied with their lives are more likely to regularly attend church.

Kooli

phutyle wrote: »

Any camera club, or GAA club (to give only two examples), is open and inclusive to different ages, genders and ethnicities. The only problematic criteria on the list would be interests, obviously. If you're not into photography, a camera club isn't going to provide you with a sense of community. But that applies to a church too. If you don't share your interests with that of the church, it's not going to be an attractive community to you. So I don't see the difference between the two at that level (there's obviously huge differences at other levels).

I think churches (specifically The Catholic Church in Ireland) is seen as a special case because it's so big, and has historically had such a large role to play in society. It's like some people can't see past it. Yet, many of us successfully live without it quite happily on a daily basis.

You're basically saying that you can't think of an organisation that has as many members as the CC. Maybe that's true (I don't know), but I don't see how it concerns the matter of "goodness" in any qualitative sense.

Yeah the interests thing will be a barrier. You may say the interests would exclude people from the church, but I reckon if I was really lonely and marginalised I would still turn up just for a sense of belonging even if I wasn't particularly 'interested'. Or maybe I'd become interested as a result of coming along for the sense of community.
A weekly class in anything or a weekly match is never going to have the same reach as a parish community. And I think that's partly what has helped the church maintain its strength over the decades - because of the other benefits that go along with membership.

I know a lady who's retired and lives in Inchicore and is heavily involved in the church and gets loads out of it, so it's not just a rural thing. She also talks about how much it has helped young immigrant families to feel settled. Would it really be as useful for her or the African families to join a camera club?

Sarky

Every games convention I visit has an age range from 5-60ish (probably higher, I'm crap at telling age) and cares nothing for gender, sexuality, ethnicity, or anything like that. Act the dick and you'll be removed, simple enough. And way more fun than a church. Of course if you don't like games/fantasy/sci-fi/general looniness then they probably won't appeal to you. But there are plenty of other ways to belong to something that don't involve debasing yourself like a worthless pleb.

Gregor Samsa

Kooli wrote: »

She also talks about how much it has helped young immigrant families to feel settled. Would it really be as useful for her or the African families to join a camera club?

Why not, if they're interested in photography? If the camera club provides an outlet for their interests, they'll meet plenty of like minded people in a supportive social setting. Whether photography is of interest to many recently arrived Africa immigrants, well that's as different point. My point is that one size doesn't fit all, and that includes the church. Don't get bogged down in specific examples.

There's an African family in my estate. They're not Catholic, and they attend one of the churches on our town with a mainly African congregation. But their kids all go to the local Gaelscoil, and play camogie. What could be more integrated than the sight I see of those kids out playing hurling on the green in our estate with all the ethnically Irish kids?

Mark Hamill

Kooli wrote: »

I'm not sure there is yet a secular replacement for the 'community' role the church plays. A central place where all ages and types are welcomed and can even play an active role. A person who is available for a chat with anyone any time.
Where would the 70 year old with no kids or family find a sense of community?
Where would the African immigrant who knows no one find a sense of community?
Where would the slightly weird but harmless neighbour find a community where he can belong and help out etc?

Boards.ie?

Heres Your Future

Kind of a strange question if a serious one. I would have thought it was fairly obvious that there are good things about religion just as there are bad things about it.

Religion and being a member of a church provides a sense of community and support.
Religious people tend to live longer than non religious people (possibly related to the above)
Religious people tend to score higher on measures of happiness than non religious people.
Great art, music, literature and architecture.
Most religions promote charity as a worthy aspiration, many religious charities.
Religion provides a moral code by which to live your life, if everybody (whether religious or not) obeyed the golden rule 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you' then the world would probably be a nicer place to live in for everybody.

One could go on, not that it matters much either way.

gothictwilight

"Anything good about religion at all?"

Yes.

fitz0

Heres Your Future wrote: »

Religious people tend to live longer than non religious people (possibly related to the above)
Religious people tend to score higher on measures of happiness than non religious people.

Link?

gothictwilight

religious people have natural rhythm.
They can also do the Vulcan hand greeting thing.
Religious people also tend to make better cobblers

Jellicoe

From the BBC religions site

Under the Atheism section :

The good

Most atheists willingly concede there are some good things about religion, such as:

Religious art and music
Religious charities and good works
Much religious wisdom and scripture
Human fellowship and togetherness

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/

Liamario

Penn wrote: »

Would that man have lived forever? No, he would not, therefore I can't be arrested for stabbing him 37 times in the heart.

F**king snap!!!
Jenga!
Bingo!
Yahtzee!

Turtwig

Heres Your Future wrote: »

Religious people tend to live longer than non religious people (possibly related to the above)
Religious people tend to score higher on measures of happiness than non religious people.

These studies tend to categorise religious people as regular church goers which is a bit self defeating. If you're able to regularly attend church and other practices then odds are you're not having seriously impacting personal issues in the first place. So yeah, d'uh, that group would tend to live longer than those who can't regularly attend such services.

Sarky

gothictwilight wrote: »

religious people have natural rhythm.

Ahahahahahahahahahaa.

Mickeroo

Ah here, everyone knows heathens make the best music.

Heres Your Future

fitz0 wrote: »

Link?

errrrr not that am i advocating wikipedia as the new bible or anything but try this for starters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_and_happiness

its not exactly hugely controversial or anything, would it really have been that difficult to google it yourself?

Turtwig

Heres Your Future wrote: »

errrrr not that am i advocating wikipedia as the new bible or anything but try this for starters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_and_happiness

its not exactly hugely controversial or anything, would it really have been that difficult to google it yourself?

This is a discussion forum so expecting people to google stuff they've asked you to support is generally frowned upon. Apart from good etiquette though it's actually always in your interest to provide the links when asked for. Otherwise when the person Googles your concept they might find the wrong flavour and end up with a complete misrepresentation and understanding of your actual intended point. For example, if you mentioned Religious Freedom and that subsequently led the uninformed Googler into the Realm of Conservapedia you'd have one headache of a time trying to actually discuss the concept of Religious freedom with that person.

Best to provide your own links when asked for and wait for people to provide their criticisms, if any, to those links. That way at least you have of some chance of keeping both parties in the discussion on the same page.

kylith

gothictwilight wrote: »

"Anything good about religion at all?"

Yes.

Care to elaborate?

gothictwilight

kylith wrote: »

Care to elaborate?

Sure

Newaglish

You can't deny that Christmas is a larf.

robindch

Gothic -- great to have you here, but you will be expected to make a contribution. Sooner rather than later would be good.

wp_rathead

robindch wrote: »

Gothic -- great to have you here, but you will be expected to make a contribution. Sooner rather than later would be good.

gothictwilight wrote:

religious people have natural rhythm.
They can also do the Vulcan hand greeting thing.
Religious people also tend to make better cobblers

in fairness, its more of a contribution I'v made to A&A Forum:p

smokingman

It does feed delusion and, as can be seen in placebo effects, this can sometimes be good for people of a certain persuasion.

Turtwig

wprathead wrote: »

in fairness, its more of a contribution I'v made to A&A Forum:p

Care to elaborate?
(Reply with "Sure." and nothing more and you'll probably then understand where Rob is coming from. Repeat this or similar in several other threads while making unsubstantiated digs at atheists and agnostics and you'll definitely understand where Rob is coming from.:) )

B9K9

anything good? - comforting myths(lies) to certain people.
anything bad? - discomforting lies(myths) to certain people.