This is something that is puzzling me. How does this work? What is it about religions that could inspire someone to be a better person than they were before?

If anyone could explain it, that would be great. Thanks!

[Edited after consideration]

I kind of compare it to bribes and threats. Those can also inspire someone to be a better person, or at least in their actions. I'm not in favor of the "ends justifying the means" approaches, but inspiration can work in those ways.

Yeah, it may produce better behavior, or rather desirable behavior. It doesn't make the person actually good though, it's just forcing them to act a certain way. If you have to threaten someone, then clearly they are acting against their nature.

I suppose the argument could be made that it becomes part of their nature, if they act that way long enough.

That brings up the question of how ethical it is to "program" someone by fear.

And the thing is, how would you convince the person that they are now being "better"? According to their own standards, they are now doing things that go against their own values.

for the external observer, scripture cherry picking is a big help in keeping the religious folks from committing all manner of odious and creepy behavior (still menstruating? better go kill some more birds, and your husband had better kill a couple just to be sure)

However, Scripture cherry picking is predicated on the pew warmer assuming they know more than God about how things otta be done, so it is a vile abomination to do so.

I bet, A lot of poor people aren't committing crimes or showing their ugly natural side because there is police. So, this also is programming by fear, but its vital.

Believers like to put criminals and sinners on the same level...

I suppose in some cases it may be true that an otherwise good but unmotivated person could be inspired to act by the example of some revered figure.

Of course, this doesn't really address the OP, since it would be an inspiration to do good, rather than to be good -- whatever that means.

Herd programming.

It's more than just the ultimate reward or punishment.

Religion provides context; reward provides incentive. What is difficult about this?

(January 16, 2017 at 3:09 am)robvalue Wrote: Yeah, it may produce better behavior, or rather desirable behavior. It doesn't make the person actually good though, it's just forcing them to act a certain way. If you have to threaten someone, then clearly they are acting against their nature.

I suppose the argument could be made that it becomes part of their nature, if they act that way long enough.

That brings up the question of how ethical it is to "program" someone by fear.

And the thing is, how would you convince the person that they are now being "better"? According to their own standards, they are now doing things that go against their own values.

"To do is to be," to paraphrase Sartre. We are the sum of our actions. There is no "you" lurking underneath the surface. If religion can inspire people to act better than they would without it, I'd be satisfied. But there's little evidence of that generally.

Most religitards define being a better person as being closer to the ideals put forward by whatever cult is doing the defining.  You can bet your sweet ass that xristards are not impressed by people being good muslims.