Religion did do some good.

tomofson

I am in no way a religious person and consider myself an agnostic. But religion has done some good for instance I dont think the western world could of evolved the way it has without christianity I do think religion has being a pillar in society for all the bad it has brought it has done some amount of good. I am in no way a huge fan of religion but I like to be realistic when I can and the facts are that it has done some good. I also dont believe wars are fought over religion although that was a belief I had for a long time, now I see that ego power and greed are main reasons for wars, while religion is just used to rally up a few footsoldiers.

Stealthfins

It's good for starting discussion alright.

mahoganygas

So did dropping the H-bomb.
We learned from it and moved on.

I doubt you will find any agnostic who will say Religion has only done bad.
And if you do, I say that person is a fundamentalist bigot.

tomofson

mahoganygas wrote: »

So did dropping the H-bomb.
We learned from it and moved on.

I doubt you will find any agnostic who will say Religion has only done bad.
And if you do, I say that person is a fundamentalist bigot.

I dont see how the H bomb done any good alls it did was massacre people indiscriminately, If thats your version of good.

mahoganygas

tomofson wrote: »

I dont see how the H bomb done any good alls it did was massacre people indiscriminately, If thats your version of good.

In a perverse way dropping the H-bomb ended the war early.

My point is that life isn't always black or white, good or bad.

tomofson

mahoganygas wrote: »

In a perverse way dropping the H-bomb ended the war early.

My point is that life isn't always black or white, good or bad.

Yeah true its not black or white

One eyed Jack

tomofson wrote: »

I dont see how the H bomb done any good alls it did was massacre people indiscriminately, If thats your version of good.

mahoganygas' argument isn't any different to your own with reference to the way societies evolved after the deployment of the atomic bomb. It depends upon your perspective and the way you're viewing the picture as to whether anything on balance has either had a positive or negative influence upon a society.

There are plenty of arguments could be presented to argue either positive or negatives of religion and it's influence upon society. Whether a society having evolved with Christianity as one of it's pillars is a good thing, is debatable, particularly when you take how society evolved to the point it's at now in the US, and contrast that with European society.

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

I dont see how the H bomb done any good alls it did was massacre people indiscriminately, If thats your version of good.

So did "god"

tomofson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So did "god"

Are you sure that wasn't man?

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

Are you sure that wasn't man?

Nope

Indiscriminately killed everyone (men, women,children,unborn children) when he flooded earth.

Pompei, tsunami, earthquakes, forest fires (due to lightening strikes) all acts of "god" that killed indiscriminately

tomofson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Nope

Indiscriminately killed everyone (men, women,children,unborn children) when he flooded earth.

Pompei, tsunami, earthquakes, forest fires (due to lightening strikes) all acts of "god" that killed indiscriminately

Well if god created all humans he did create them all to die someday so yes in a way he is killing us all indiscriminately by default. However not everything you mentioned was acts of a god but more of a p!ssed off planet we take advantage of.

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

Well if god created all humans he did create them all to die someday so yes in a way he is killing us all indiscriminately by default.

But in the Noah fairytale it's obvious that this ever loving "god" has had a hiss fit and decided to murder everyone. Is that not killing indiscriminately?

tomofson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

But in the Noah fairytale it's obvious that this ever loving "god" has had a hiss fit and decided to murder everyone. Is that not killing indiscriminately?

Well if you wanna start getting technical einstein he killed us all indiscriminately when he made death a natural consequence of merely being born

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

Well if you wanna start getting technical einstein he killed us all indiscriminately when he made death a natural consequence of merely being born

Nothing technical about it kiddo, "god" had a hissy fit and murdered everyone (even unborn babies, abortion is ok for "god"). You said only man does this, Noah tale is proof that not only man does this

magicbastarder

mahoganygas wrote: »

In a perverse way dropping the H-bomb ended the war early.

we dropped the H-bomb in a war? when? no-one told me about this.

tomofson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Nothing technical about it kiddo, "god" had a hissy fit and murdered everyone (even unborn babies, abortion is ok for "god"). You said only man does this, Noah tale is proof that not only man does this

Not too sure about that Noahs tale is written by a man about hes perception of those events.

silverharp

its not really a what "god" done thread? I think its reasonable to accept that religion gave an evolutionary advantage in the past but that its about time that the training wheels came off.

tomofson

silverharp wrote: »

its not really a what "god" done thread? I think its reasonable to accept that religion gave an evolutionary advantage in the past but that its about time that the training wheels came off.

Not too sure I know what you mean by the "training wheels" coming off

meeeeh

Religion is made of good and bad people the same as anything. However it has a bit disproportionate power and ability to protect itself. The same can be said for different political movements without the longevity religion has.

silverharp

tomofson wrote: »

Not too sure I know what you mean by the "training wheels" coming off

enforcing a morality based on a mythical big brother looking over your shoulder. Going forward , morality has to be based on knowledge and understanding of known consequences of doing or not doing x y or z

tomofson

silverharp wrote: »

enforcing a morality based on a mythical big brother looking over your shoulder. Going forward , morality has to be based on knowledge and understanding of known consequences of doing or not doing x y or z

It took religion to bring morality into the human conscience, now you just want to do away with the whole belief while condescending it? A little ungrateful if you ask me.

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

It took religion to bring morality into the human conscience, now you just want to do away with the whole belief while condescending it? A little ungrateful if you ask me.

Can you prove this?

What of the indigenous tribes deep in the Amazon who have never seen a white person never mind know of any religions? Are you saying they have no morality?

tomofson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Can you prove this?

What of the indigenous tribes deep in the Amazon who have never seen a white person never mind know of any religions? Are you saying they have no morality?

They do have their own versions of religion.

mahoganygas

tomofson wrote: »

It took religion to bring morality into the human conscience

Did it?

silverharp

tomofson wrote: »

It took religion to bring morality into the human conscience, now you just want to do away with the whole belief while condescending it? A little ungrateful if you ask me.

I don't agree with your post. Religion didn't invent morality , it broadly codified the existing morality. what religion did do was make people adhere to the rules more than if they had been left to their own devices.

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

They do have their own versions of religion.

How do you know this?

tomofson

silverharp wrote: »

I don't agree with your post. Religion didn't invent morality , it broadly codified the existing morality. what religion did do was make people adhere to the rules more than if they had been left to their own devices.

I dont think a bunch of hunter gatherers throwing spears at each other and beating their women over the heads with rocks and violently raping them had much morality

mahoganygas

Morality is not a product of religion.

Religion is a by-product of morality.

tomofson

mahoganygas wrote: »

Morality is not a product of religion.

Religion is a by-product of morality.

So you are admitting the founders of religion where extremely moral people?

mahoganygas

tomofson wrote: »

So you are admitting the founders of religion where extremely moral people?

Yes, humans are very moral people.

tomofson

mahoganygas wrote: »

Yes, humans are very moral people.

I'd more say the opposite.

mahoganygas

tomofson wrote: »

I'd more say the opposite.

That is certainly fair.

Why do you think religion was founded?

Where do you think morality came from?

silverharp

tomofson wrote: »

I dont think a bunch of hunter gatherers throwing spears at each other and beating their women over the heads with rocks and violently raping them had much morality

they didn't have much in the way of society either. Humans developed their own morality ( most of it fairly logical) , unless you think the Egyptian gods actually gave ancient Egyptians a morality?
to take a simple case like honesty , trade couldn't exist unless honesty could be enforced and or recognised.

tomofson

mahoganygas wrote: »

That is certainly fair.

Why do you think religion was founded?

Where do you think morality came from?

A certain amount or moral people, but human beings as a whole by my own experiences and observations are not a moral people.

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

A certain amount or moral people, but human beings as a whole by my own experiences and observations are not a moral people.

That depends on tour interpretation of moral. What evidence can you post to support this claim?

mahoganygas

tomofson wrote: »

A certain amount or moral people, but human beings as a whole by my own experiences and observations are not a moral people.

This comes back to the first point we had.
By what yard stick do you measure right and wrong?
Was it wrong to drop the H-bomb and potentially save millions of lives by ending the war?

Who is to say that your idea of morality is right? Or mine? Or the pilot of the enola gay?

tomofson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

That depends on tour interpretation of moral. What evidence can you post to support this claim?

They are my own observations the majority of human beings will Fukk over other human beings if there is anything to gain from doing so, because the human condition is me me me.

tomofson

mahoganygas wrote: »

This comes back to the first point we had.
By what yard stick do you measure right and wrong?
Was it wrong to drop the H-bomb and potentially save millions of lives by ending the war?

Who is to say that your idea of morality is right? Or mine? Or the pilot of the enola gay?

Well obviously I will say my morality is right and you will say your morality is right

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

They are my own observations the majority of human beings will Fukk over other human beings if there is anything to gain from doing so, because the human condition is me me me.

Yet my own observations say the total opposite. Sure there are people in the world like this and they come from every race, class, creed and colour but from my own experience the majority of people will go out of their way to help others.

meeeeh

tomofson wrote: »

A certain amount or moral people, but human beings as a whole by my own experiences and observations are not a moral people.

What kind of morality? I would argue morality is a social construct like religion that helps society to function. They might have started from similar starting point but evolved into very different direction.

tomofson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Yet my own observations say the total opposite. Sure there are people in the world like this and they come from every race, class, creed and colour but from my own experience the majority of people will go out of their way to help others.

Those sort of people definitely exist and I doubt I would even be alive today without them. But they are by no means the majority. Some people will help another in the hope of eventually gaining something from it.

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

Those sort of people definitely exist and I doubt I would even be alive today without them. But they are by no means the majority. Some people will help another in the hope of eventually gaining something from it.

There are over 7 billion people in the world, you are taking your experience with a tiny amount of those and relating it to the majority.

As for the bolded

What does a surgeon gain from saving lives

What does a carer gain when helping with sick/old/dying?

What does I gain if I give a homeless person €5?

I think what you are seeing is actually what's inside yourself and you don't like what you see so you project it onto others so you don't feel so bad.

nozzferrahhtoo

tomofson wrote: »

But religion has done some good for instance I dont think the western world could of evolved the way it has without christianity

That is a bit of a blanket statement without any real content though.

The first problem is "X could not have happened this way without Y" does not automatically imply Y is good. Perhaps the western world would have been DIFFERENT without Christianity, but you have a LOT more work to do to show whether it would have been better or worse without it.

Secondly you could replace "Christianity" with just about anything and still make the same amount of sense. For example "I dont think the western world could have evolved the way it has without cake". Or "I do not think Europe would have evolved the way it has without Hitler". In essence your sentence merely states the obvious.

tomofson wrote: »

I do think religion has being a pillar in society for all the bad it has brought it has done some amount of good.

Perhaps SOME. But that again does not say very much. One needs to quantify WHAT good it did. And what price we paid for it. And whether we could have attained the same good without religion. Your statement is, once again, too general to have any merit or application really.

So you could start by.....

tomofson wrote: »

the facts are that it has done some good.

..... specifying what "good" you are referring to. Quantity it, then ask what we paid for it, and ask what other ways we could have attained those goods without religion.

tomofson wrote: »

It took religion to bring morality into the human conscience

Did it? How have you established that one exactly?

meeeeh

tomofson wrote: »

Those sort of people definitely exist and I doubt I would even be alive today without them. But they are by no means the majority. Some people will help another in the hope of eventually gaining something from it.

Actually quite popular idea in social sciences would be that true altruism does not exist. There is always some payback for person doing the good deed.

tomofson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

There are over 7 billion people in the world, you are taking your experience with a tiny amount of those and relating it to the majority.

As for the bolded

What does a surgeon gain from saving lives

What does a carer gain when helping with sick/old/dying?

What does I gain if I give a homeless person €5?

I think what you are seeing is actually what's inside yourself and you don't like what you see so you project it onto others so you don't feel so bad.

I said some people give in the hope of eventually getting something in return from it not every single human on the planet does. I could give you a story of a relative of mine who done something very small for me years ago and now every time he sees me brings it up so i will give him money to buy drugs but i wont go there. A certain other relative of mine done something very two faced on me as recent as monday but i wont get into that either.
and the majority of people view the sick/old/dying as liabilities and wouldnt dare help them and the VAST majority of people look at the homeless with spite.

smacl

Organised religion has historically formed one of the largest power structures in human society. Those who ruthlessly seek power tend be less pleasant members of society, and power also has a tendency to corrupt those it is thrust upon over time. In modern societies we attempt, albeit poorly at present, to limit the corrupting effect of power held by those in authority by monitoring their actions and limiting what they can do without democratic approval. This does not happen in organised religions, which rarely act in a transparent manner, and work by and large behind closed doors. In doing so, religion provides the ideal environment for all sorts of undesirables to flourish. At the same time, it seeks to control and stymie things like freedom of sexual expression and sexual equality. What value it might have contributed to the development of morality in its formative years has long since come and gone, and for my money should be consigned to history as a colourful part of human development.

tomofson

smacl wrote: »

Organised religion has historically formed one of the largest power structures in human society. Those who ruthlessly seek power tend be less pleasant members of society, and power also has a tendency to corrupt those it is thrust upon over time. In modern societies we attempt, albeit poorly at present, to limit the corrupting effect of power held by those in authority by monitoring their actions and limiting what they can do without democratic approval. This does not happen in organised religions, which rarely act in a transparent manner, and work by and large behind closed doors. In doing so, religion provides the ideal environment for all sorts of undesirables to flourish. At the same time, it seeks to control and stymie things like freedom of sexual expression and sexual equality. What value it might have contributed to the development of morality in its formative years has long since come and gone, and for my money should be consigned to history as a colourful part of human development.

No those are bad people manipulating the system, they manipulate all systems religious or not.

mahoganygas

tomofson wrote: »

No those are bad people manipulating the system, they manipulate all systems religious or not.

That sounds like you are blaming bad individuals for organised religion's failings.

Leaving religion in the past, if we woke up tomorrow and religion no longer existed, do you think we would be worse off?

Timberrrrrrrr

tomofson wrote: »

I said some people give in the hope of eventually getting something in return from it not every single human on the planet does. I could give you a story of a relative of mine who done something very small for me years ago and now every time he sees me brings it up so i will give him money to buy drugs but i wont go there. A certain other relative of mine done something very two faced on me as recent as monday but i wont get into that either.
and the majority of people view the sick/old/dying as liabilities and wouldnt dare help them and the VAST majority of people look at the homeless with spite.

You said

tomofson wrote: »

They are my own observations the majority of human beings will Fukk over other human beings if there is anything to gain from doing so, because the human condition is me me me.

Again I would love to see your evidence for this.

While your at it why not show evidence for this disgusting claim

the majority of people view the sick/old/dying as liabilities and wouldnt dare help them and the VAST majority of people look at the homeless with spite

silverharp

smacl wrote: »

At the same time, it seeks to control and stymie things like freedom of sexual expression and sexual equality. What value it might have contributed to the development of morality in its formative years has long since come and gone, and for my money should be consigned to history as a colourful part of human development.

if you take sexual expression for example , in a pre industrial society it made societal sense to enforce restrictions. If religion wasnt involved there would still have been taboos which were important for group survival.

tomofson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You said



Again I would love to see your evidence for this.

While your at it why not show evidence for this disgusting claim

Those are my personal observations of how the human mind works