Religion factor

[MigL]

11 hours ago, iNow said:

And before religion, tribal cultures, mores, and triggers for ostracization from groups did the same thing. 

This may have worked for tribes and small groups, but the largest city in the world, nearly 5000 years ago, Uruk ( Uruk - Wikipedia ), in Sumer/Mesopotamia had 40000 dwellers.
Many tribes had to co-habitate; a much  more uncontrollable situation without societal structures imposing social mores.
That is the 'so what' I am talking about.

And for clarification, I fully agree with Sethoflagos, I am not religious myself, but I don't deny others the choice to live their lives according to their own beliefs.
( I omly 'bitch' about it when they try to impose those beliefs, whatever they may be, on me )

[iNow]

13 hours ago, MigL said:

Many tribes had to co-habitate; a much  more uncontrollable situation without societal structures imposing social mores.

Totally agree. What’s that have to do with religion? Other sources of social mores were clearly present and contributing to all that. Why lay the wreath of victory squarely at the feet of theistic religion?

 

13 hours ago, MigL said:

I am not religious myself, but I don't deny others the choice to live their lives according to their own beliefs.

Again, we’re in violent agreement. I can’t stop people from believing in stupid fictions, but will defend like Voltaire their right to live life in such a foolish misplaced trust kinda way. 

13 hours ago, MigL said:

( I omly 'bitch' about it when they try to impose those beliefs, whatever they may be, on me )

Yeah. Thank goodness their prohibition nonsense got reversed, for example. Christmas with the extended family would be hard if being sober for amorphous religious reasons were mandated for all. Like in Qatar, for example (but even there the wealthy have ways of cheating). 

[mistermack]

22 hours ago, MigL said:

( I omly 'bitch' about it when they try to impose those beliefs, whatever they may be, on me )

Apply that logic to other stuff, and I only bitch about murder when they try to murder me. 

Religions usually do their imposing subtly, in the modern era. Murder one cartoonist, and you shut all the others up. Ban abortion for women, by claiming to be 'pro life' , when you're actually 'pro bible'. 

Religious beliefs are imposed massively on billions of defenceless children, under the guise of 'saving' them. 

 

[MigL]

Actions affect others; beliefs do not.
I wouldn't want to confuse what we are discussing.

[mistermack]

41 minutes ago, MigL said:

I wouldn't want to confuse what we are discussing.

And yet earlier you claimed that religion led to civilisation. You made no distinction there. Historically, beliefs and actions went hand in hand. 

[Phi for All]

56 minutes ago, MigL said:

Actions affect others; beliefs do not.
I wouldn't want to confuse what we are discussing.

This seems like pure semantics. Those with hateful beliefs can affect others through inaction, like doing nothing to help those they hate. You don't have to wait until they decide to take action on their beliefs.

[Moontanman]

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

Apply that logic to other stuff, and I only bitch about murder when they try to murder me.

I only bitch when they try to force their version of reality on everyone else. 

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

Religions usually do their imposing subtly, in the modern era. Murder one cartoonist, and you shut all the others up. Ban abortion for women, by claiming to be 'pro life' , when you're actually 'pro bible'. 

Actually the Bible allows for abortion and only considers a child to be alive after it takes its first breath. 

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

Religious beliefs are imposed massively on billions of defenceless children, under the guise of 'saving' them. 

 

Exactly

2 hours ago, MigL said:

Actions affect others; beliefs do not.
I wouldn't want to confuse what we are discussing.

Beliefs are used to excuse actions demanded by those very beliefs. 

[MigL]

Actions can be made illegal, and many are.
I, for one, don't wish to live in a world where thoughts and beliefs can be made illegal.
Do you ?
 

[Moontanman]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

Actions can be made illegal, and many are.
I, for one, don't wish to live in a world where thoughts and beliefs can be made illegal.
Do you ?
 

Who suggested that thoughts and beliefs should be illegal? 

[dimreepr]

On 12/29/2022 at 2:54 PM, dimreepr said:

Then shut up and calculate...

Ok, with 3 negs it's clear my meaning has been misunderstood, certainly no insult intended; please consider it within the contex of this recent exchange.

This comment should have been in quotes: 

It's something @MarkusHankesaid in a recent debate we had about the role of teacher's on our thinking.

Even if, like Markus, you are capable of teaching yourself to a PhD level, you still need a teacher to teach you the fundamentals that allow a base from which to build.

Not everybody is capable of reaching PhD level, however good the teacher is.

The point is, if we have no specific reason's to doubt our teacher's, there is no specific reason to question the teaching of religion's, it's not really about a diety, it's about our human condition and how to help the most people to feel, at least, content and basically happy to see what tomorrow will bring; through various cultural lenses. 

[Genady]

10 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

if we have no specific reason's to doubt our teacher

I don't think we need a specific reason to doubt our teachers, or anything. Skepticism is a default state.

BTW, I didn't know about the negs, and none of them is mine. Although, I did (mis)understand that post as an insult.

[Phi for All]

19 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

The point is, if we have no specific reason's to doubt our teacher's, there is no specific reason to question the teaching of religion's, it's not really about a diety, it's about our human condition and how to help the most people to feel, at least, content and basically happy to see what tomorrow will bring; through various cultural lenses. 

It's a nice fairy tale you've got here that bears little resemblance to much of organized religion. To them, it's VERY MUCH about a deity, and their relationship with that deity, and the benefits their belief in that deity bring them. The human condition considerations are normally only for believers, or those they want to convert.

[Lorentz Jr]

On 12/30/2022 at 10:06 AM, Phi for All said:

This seems like pure semantics. Those with hateful beliefs can affect others through inaction, like doing nothing to help those they hate.

Acts of omission.

[Phi for All]

57 minutes ago, Lorentz Jr said:

Acts of omission.

Which are often easily justified by the religious. You don't have to feed the child if they've been bad, right? 

[Lorentz Jr]

29 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Which are often easily justified by the religious. You don't have to feed the child if they've been bad, right? 

I'm not trying to participate in the substance of the discussion, Phi. I was just trying to clarify @MigL's distinction between inner thoughts and outward behavior.

[MigL]

Then why not ask me ?

I am allowed to like, or dislike, anyone I so choose, whether it be for the way they cut their hair, their personal hygene, OR, their skin color.
Just as I would be allowed to prefer the company of men, if I was gay, over the company of women.
However, I am not allowed to treat men and women differently in aspects that affect them, like jobs, voting, and any other social constructs.
The same goes for people of different skin colors, different hygene practices ( cultural ), and even haircuts.

There are, and should be laws against behaviours that we, as a society, deem repugnant.
There can't, and shouldn't be laws against independant/different thought.
We are a long way from 'Minority Report'.
( the Tom Cruise movie )