Can religion be positive

[Jacob(smooth)]

This was sort of a question which arose in my mind from the "is religion child abuse" thread.

Is religion always a bad thing?

I'll go on a limb here and say I think not. I honestly believe that had I not found my faith when I did I would not be here. It was a valuable crutch at a time when I desperately needed one. It was, I now believe, based on a lie, but it was no less effective for that, a "spiritual placebo" if you will. No active ingredient but still gives results.

What say you?

[Alex K]

Is religion always a bad thing?

Probably not. Life is messy. In my ideal world it's always wrong and I therefore want nothing to do with it. But you can certainly cook up scenarios where people are better off with the placebo, at least for some time. The question is how highly you value knowing the truth over preventing suffering, for yourself and for others.

[Dystopia]

Faith and religion obviously have benefits - It's just that the inconvenients and disadvantages are superior. Logically, if religion had 0 advantages for people no one would be religious, there are many positives like having a sense of belonging, coping better with death, being able to live without questioning since all questions are already answered...

[Chad32]

If you cherry pick the most positive parts, and take a very liberal view with the rest, you can do positive things. christians know how to gain money, and sometimes they give it to charity. However, I'm certain that these are just good people that happen to be religious, and good people tend to do good things. You could give to charity without religion. I read Bill Gates give more to charity than anyone else, and he's an atheist.

Can religion be positive? Only if you ignore a lot of it, including the very important commandment to put your religion before your fellow people. More often than not, religion holds people back instead of empowering them.

[pocaracas]

Is religion always a bad thing?

As much as anything else...

Is murder always a bad thing?

[Nope]

Is religion always a bad thing?

Probably not. Life is messy. In my ideal world it's always wrong and I therefore want nothing to do with it. But you can certainly cook up scenarios where people are better of with the placebo, at least for some time. The question is how highly you value knowing the truth over preventing suffering, for yourself and for others.

I have a good friend who had some self esteem issues stemming from the fact that her father was an abusive asshole. Believing that god loved her helped her. Most of us are going to be weak or vulnerable at some time in our lives. I can't fault someone for using whatever crutch they need to get through those times but it would be nice if they could throw the crutch away once they didn't need it any longer.

[h4ym4n]

Why can't people be good and do good things without giving credit to god/religion.

[FatAndFaithless]

I'm sure you can concoct specific situations where having some sort of belief that can be attributed to a religion would be considered "positive", but I pretty firmly believe that there is no political or philosophical stance, no moral ideal or course of action, and no personal benefit or advantage from religion that cannot be accomplished by more secular means without reliance on faith or ephemeral promises.

Believing in things (even positive things) for no reason or for bad reasons is just plainly inferior to believing in those things for good reasons, and religion gives people bad reasons for being good. Not to mention the fact that religious thinking isn't usually constrained to a single stance on a single facet of a single issue, and that kind of logic-poisoned-by-faith frame of addressing the world often does more collateral damage to one's other beliefs than it gains from having a positive stance on that one particular belief.

So yes, in specific, in-a-vacuum, isolated situations, maybe having a religious belief can be "positive", but overall I think the best that religious belief can reach is "neutral" or "unnecessary" when compared to secular ways of addressing the world.

[Jacob(smooth)]

I'm sure you can concoct specific situations where having some sort of belief that can be attributed to a religion would be considered "positive", but I pretty firmly believe that there is no political or philosophical stance, no moral ideal or course of action, and no personal benefit or advantage from religion that cannot be accomplished by more secular means without reliance on faith or ephemeral promises.

Believing in things (even positive things) for no reason or for bad reasons is just plainly inferior to believing in those things for good reasons, and religion gives people bad reasons for being good. Not to mention the fact that religious thinking isn't usually constrained to a single stance on a single facet of a single issue, and that kind of logic-poisoned-by-faith frame of addressing the world often does more collateral damage to one's other beliefs than it gains from having a positive stance on that one particular belief.

So yes, in specific, in-a-vacuum, isolated situations, maybe having a religious belief can be "positive", but overall I think the best that religious belief can reach is "neutral" or "unnecessary" when compared to secular ways of addressing the world.

That's a relevant point. Chewing willow bark can be positive, but not so positive as taking an aspirin.

[FatAndFaithless]

I'm sure you can concoct specific situations where having some sort of belief that can be attributed to a religion would be considered "positive", but I pretty firmly believe that there is no political or philosophical stance, no moral ideal or course of action, and no personal benefit or advantage from religion that cannot be accomplished by more secular means without reliance on faith or ephemeral promises.

Believing in things (even positive things) for no reason or for bad reasons is just plainly inferior to believing in those things for good reasons, and religion gives people bad reasons for being good. Not to mention the fact that religious thinking isn't usually constrained to a single stance on a single facet of a single issue, and that kind of logic-poisoned-by-faith frame of addressing the world often does more collateral damage to one's other beliefs than it gains from having a positive stance on that one particular belief.

So yes, in specific, in-a-vacuum, isolated situations, maybe having a religious belief can be "positive", but overall I think the best that religious belief can reach is "neutral" or "unnecessary" when compared to secular ways of addressing the world.

That's a relevant point. Chewing willow bark can be positive, but not so positive as taking an aspirin.

And, the process by which one arrives at choosing willow bark over aspirin can affect other conclusions one reaches, potentially leading to a decision that is far more damaging. Beliefs don't exist in a vacuum.