(June 26, 2017 at 10:43 pm)Khemikal Wrote: That, in many more words, was the point of the book I linked you. The author thinks that people -can- be content with that. That the things that people seek out from their religious traditions can be achieved without those traditions.
Religiosity, in and of itself, is not irrationality. To make that stick, you'd have to explicitly refer to the articles of the faith, as it were.
Well, faith is the word there, that's the one we know is irrational. If faith is an intrinsic component of religion (irrationality) then my point sticks, but if you divorce faith from religion, I fail to see how it remains justified in being called religion. It's just loading a word with something that doesn't belong there. But then we dispute definitions quite a bit, don't we?
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
