RE: WHY RELIGION?
February 25, 2019 at 6:05 pm
(This post was last modified: February 25, 2019 at 6:16 pm by Belacqua.)
(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.
I was responding to fredd bear's OP, in which he wrote:
Quote:In my opinion, religious faith meets some very basic human needs.
So you might want to argue it with him. Do you feel he's wrong? That religion doesn't in fact meet these needs?
You're starting from the premise that religion isn't driven by reason and demands self-deception. Are you sure this is true in every case? What I was suggesting is that if it does meet "very basic human needs," as the OP states, then choosing religion may be a reasonable choice.
I guess you can oppose fredd bear's assertion, and say that it doesn't meet any needs. Or you can argue that it's better to stick to a certain kind of scientific rationality and go without having our very basic human needs met. Or I guess we could think about how life can have its basic needs met in other ways. This would require an analysis of what those basic needs are, how we satisfy them, if it's good to satisfy them, etc.
I'm not sure that it's a simple equation.
