(February 25, 2019 at 2:12 pm)900ft j Wrote:(February 21, 2019 at 6:53 am)Belaqua Wrote: "If a person can get so many of his basic human needs met by religion, isn't it reasonable to be religious?"
No, it's not reasonable because it isn't driven by reason. The needs are superficially met by self-deception - there's a higher power looking out for me, I never really die (awful since this can undervalue this real life), the need to feel secure through having answers to everything (I don't know, therefore god - which can interfere with searching for real answers and we can't properly deal with reality if we avoid it)...
It is far better to meet basic human needs with reason, not faith. Even the best illusions can fall apart and prevent us from realizing our own strengths.
You just described you ideology as if it is reason, itself. It's not. If a person is getting many their basic needs met by religion, they are getting many their basic needs met.
You changed the premise to suit your ideology by claiming that they weren't really getting their basic needs met. But the premise was that they are getting their basic needs met. And then you speculated about what those needs were.
Now you can attack the premise, but then it's on you to prove that people aren't getting some of their basic needs met. And that's going to put you in a position where you have to argue that you know more about what other people's basic needs are than they do.
You are confusing your ideology with reason.
We do not inherit the world from our parents. We borrow it from our children.
