(July 8, 2015 at 7:11 pm)Metis Wrote: There is only one thing I have seen faith in a deity able to produce that I have not encountered a secular institution capable of doing, and that is ecstasy. I'm not talking about Hitler making people go wild flailing at his rally, I mean genuine absolute conviction, contentment and occasionally even non-stop orgasmic bliss such as the experience several mystics like Teresa of Avila experienced.

I suspect this is because no secular institution has ever made as grandiose a claim as Christianity, so there is a far less tempting reward on offer for most Communists to devout themselves so fully. Even still the works and speeches of the likes of Julian of Norwich, John of the Cross and the two Fatima seers who died as kids are of something I have never seen elsewhere. Could be just hot-house environments leading to their productions, I have noted mystics do not appear outside of convents, monasteries or ultra devout locales but I've never seen a school or a philosophical academy produce something like that.

When I was religious, I experienced a feeling that could be described as ecstasy during prayer. No hallucinations like mystics experience but a definite high just the same. The human mind is amazing. If I had lived in the Middle Ages I might have been a mystic. My guess is that intense prayer is like meditation or maybe a form of mild self hypnosis

It would be interesting to learn how to turn such an experience on and off. Sometimes I get a similar experience when I am outside looking at very beautiful scenery.

(July 8, 2015 at 8:06 pm)ignoramus Wrote: I instinctlively voted yes.
There's something about woo which brings the majestic emotions to the surface.
Completely unfounded and misguided but true nonetheless.

I let myself soak in the bullshit at funerals usually.

Basically my point. It's unfounded and irrational but there's something in religion similar to a drug as if it was addicting, that's why, like addicts, religionists enter a State of denial and say "they're rational" and "know the truth - Addicts say "i'm not addicted" or "this is moderate and healthy"

(July 8, 2015 at 6:05 pm)Spooky Wrote: Religion is just an interesting mix of Sociology, Psychology, and Groupthink.  The serotonin produced by being a part of such groups is not unique, and can readily be experienced elsewhere.  (I voted no)

Yes, but why don't I see people showing the same devotion and feelings of "awe" towards other institutions other than religion? I mean, I see people excited about politics, culture and partying but none of these things makes people do the thing they do for religion, whether it's killing or something harmless like a prayer.

Quote:The only thing that religion produces in large quantities is murderers.

I hate it when people answer off topic to my topics - Additionally, it has produced a few interesting buildings and cultures, so there's that.

Quote:Nothing that can't be repeated with a healthy amount of drugs

But why risk your life when you can simply pray and feel awesome?

Quote:I suspect this is because no secular institution has ever made as grandiose a claim as Christianity, so there is a far less tempting reward on offer for most Communists to devout themselves so fully. Even still the works and speeches of the likes of Julian of Norwich, John of the Cross and the two Fatima seers who died as kids are of something I have never seen elsewhere. Could be just hot-house environments leading to their productions, I have noted mystics do not appear outside of convents, monasteries or ultra devout locales but I've never seen a school or a philosophical academy produce something like that.

There is no reward for being a communist, just the pleasure of maybe one day (In a lifetime?) seeing the working class triumph, and that's expecting too much.

(July 8, 2015 at 8:22 pm)Dystopia Wrote: Yes, but why don't I see people showing the same devotion and feelings of "awe" towards other institutions other than religion? I mean, I see people excited about politics, culture and partying but none of these things makes people do the thing they do for religion, whether it's killing or something harmless like a prayer.

Religion has had thousands of years to wage the meanest kind of PR Campaign: "Buy our product, or be tortured for eternity".  I would equate much of the "awe" and "devotion" to relief of an ailment religion provides the cure (as well as the cause) for.  As far as killing, people do it for lots of reasons: Sex, money, patriotism, fun, etc.  I wouldn't personally consider that a parameter for measuring how committed a person may be.

(July 8, 2015 at 8:22 pm)Dystopia Wrote: But why risk your life when you can simply pray and feel awesome?

Meditation has been known to cause the same feelings and health benefits.  I am a psychologist, so I'm decently read on many psychosomatic cases.  Look up "False Pregnancy" or "Pseudocyesis" sometime.  A female can wish to be pregnant with such fervor that they: Stop menstruating, start lactating, and in some extreme cases start showing.  All of this originates from within.  

The only reason Prayer > Meditation as far as most are concerned, I believe, is simply because of religion's very successful (and damaging) PR Campaign.


I make the statement that any and all Physical, Psychological, or Social benefits that religion provides can be had without god, without mythology, and without the fear and damage that religion causes worldwide.

Science > god

I agree with others on here, that I have had unique experiences that I would have never had, if I were raised to be an atheist. I’d say my catholic and spiritual days were about the same when in deep prayer or meditation. As a catholic, I was focusing my thoughts on the christian/catholic god and the saints, and as a spiritualist more of an unspecified higher power made of loving energy. I would reach intense stages of ecstasy, as Nope has mentioned, probably because of chemicals, such as serotonin, as Spooky mentioned.

I believe, religion is a drug, in most cases. It is highly addictive. Once this high has been experienced once, or a few times by a non-skeptical or an undeveloped mind, you get hooked. It is a unique high compared to other drugs, although I haven’t taken all the popular ones. You get this high, and if you don’t share this high with your god, you feel depressed, guilty, or you just feel like shit. This drug, just like any other drug, can affect the relationships around you. You can’t talk most people out of quitting, because they are so addicted, they can’t think straight. This habit is very difficult to break, and many experience withdrawal and relapse, when trying to get free from it. This withdrawal is a little different than more conventional drugs, but can really screw with your head.

I can’t believe, after all of these arguments against religion, the religionists can’t see how bad it actually is. That just goes to show you, that the non-religious, and the religious, see the world from a whole different perspective. I voted Yes.

(July 8, 2015 at 10:58 pm)Salacious B. Crumb Wrote: I agree with others on here, that I have had unique experiences that I would have never had, if I were raised to be an atheist. I’d say my catholic and spiritual days were about the same when in deep prayer or meditation. As a catholic, I was focusing my thoughts on the christian/catholic god and the saints, and as a spiritualist more of an unspecified higher power made of loving energy. I would reach intense stages of ecstasy, as Nope has mentioned, probably because of chemicals, such as serotonin, as Spooky mentioned.

I believe, religion is a drug, in most cases. It is highly addictive. Once this high has been experienced once, or a few times by a non-skeptical or an undeveloped mind, you get hooked. It is a unique high compared to other drugs, although I haven’t taken all the popular ones. You get this high, and if you don’t share this high with your god, you feel depressed, guilty, or you just feel like shit. This drug, just like any other drug, can affect the relationships around you. You can’t talk most people out of quitting, because they are so addicted, they can’t think straight. This habit is very difficult to break, and many experience withdrawal and relapse, when trying to get free from it. This withdrawal is a little different than more conventional drugs, but can really screw with your head.

I can’t believe, after all of these arguments against religion, the religionists can’t see how bad it actually is. That just goes to show you, that the non-religious, and the religious, see the world from a whole different perspective. I voted Yes.

@Salacious B. Crumb, a very good post.  I understand why you voted yes, and you defended it well.

I do want to remind anybody who is reading that I was a confirmed member of a Lutheran church who went to multiple church camps every summer, and taught sunday school in the winter.  I have experienced this high.

(July 8, 2015 at 6:05 pm)Spooky Wrote: Religion is just an interesting mix of Sociology, Psychology, and Groupthink.  The serotonin produced by being a part of such groups is not unique, and can readily be experienced elsewhere.  (I voted no)

I agree.  I don't think brains can magically create different chemicals if a person is religious instead of not religious.  And no one has demonstrated that religion is necessary for any particular feeling, or that one cannot achieve the same feelings from other sources.  I think the uniqueness of experience that many religious people claim is just another religious lie with no real basis in fact.  Indeed, with various "religious" experiences that people have, how they are interpreted is a function of their beliefs rather than something inherent in the experiences themselves.

I've never been religious so it's a bit hard for me to answer this.

I'm going to say no, although I admit this isn't based on anything but my logical thought.

Considering there is nothing "real" about religion, all that is actually going on is self/group delusion and social interaction. The sensations are just going to be chemicals of some sort being released in the body, or certain brain configurations. Since there is nothing magical about any of that, I see no reason why you couldn't get the same effect some other way. I'm not saying I can simply list other ways that it can be done. I'm saying that it is reasonable to expect there is more than one way to achieve this result, since it is artificial in relation to the supposed truth of the subject matter.

Now, there is a slight problem with the question. If I came up with a non-religious way of getting the same effect, it is fairly likely to share a lot of the traits with the "experience" of religion (particularly the social dynamic). So someone holding the sensations to be unique could just say, "Well that's just like religion then". A bit of a no true Scotsman fallacy. Since no one can actually label what is going on "religious" except by the testimony of its adherents, what does such a classification really mean?

I think I would be tempted to rephrase the question: does group/self delusion produce sensations that cannot be achieved otherwise? In other words, you have to really believe things that are not true. (I'm talking in realistic terms here, let's not get all agnostic and shit ) That is the part that's not so easy to reproduce. But delusion is not limited to religion either; so again, strictly speaking, it's not just religion.

Tl;dr: As religion is not "real" I can't hold it accountable for anything unique. I'd instead focus on the self/group delusion aspect.

Religion produces the same sensations that are experienced when anyone experiences something that is biologically explained in nature as an uplifting of the spirit. Religious people call it god, but all it is is chemical reactions created by the body in deference to surrounding stimuli.

Forgot one: Sex > Religion