Does the world need religion, even if it doesn't need God?

[JohnDG]

People sadly just aren't ready, but one day our civilization will grow out of it.

[AthiestAtheist]

This forum itself is a little bit of evidence.

Uhhh...

Unless we start using our real names, and someone possesses a Death Note, I don't see how we can go about killing eachother over the internet. :S

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Does the world need religion? OF course not, the world doesn't even need US, at all.

Do people need religion,en masse? Don't know. That it's virtually universal suggests (but does not prove) that they do.

In recent years,some scientists have started to suggest that attraction to the divine may be hard wired in our brains.

However,I think it's fair to say that "a lot of people" need the emotional and psychological crutch their religion provides.

Overall, I think religion fills a broad range of human needs,that it is above all a tool. How a tool is used depends on the person using it.



I think it was Seneca who said something like

to the wise religion religion is nonsense,to the ordinary people true,to the ruler,useful

[Anomalocaris]

Does the world need religion? OF course not, the world doesn't even need US, at all.

Do people need religion,en masse? Don't know. That it's virtually universal suggests (but does not prove) that they do.

That fact that people were virtually universally filthy before they discovered the wonder of bathing doesn't suggest that humans needed poor hygene, en mass.

A (slightly) better case might be made that humans tend towards indolence and would not not make the best of what they have, as a result, just as the human race may not be quite as clean as universal availability of showers might allow, so too human race may not be quite as free of religion as universal availability of scientific knowledge might permit.


[quote='padraic' pid='231444' dateline='1327443804']

I think it was Seneca who said something like

to the wise religion religion is nonsense,to the ordinary people true,to the ruler,useful

It was Edward Gibbons.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

That fact that people were virtually universally filthy before they discovered the wonder of bathing doesn't suggest that humans needed poor hygiene, en masse.

Indeed,that is I why said "suggests (but does not prove)".

Gibbons? Really? OK. Sounds like Seneca.

[Cosmic Ape]

I wish the dominate group on the planet was a Transhumanist group that was almost religious in a sense about the ideas of keeping people alive (not killing them) trying to live longer (not repressing medical science) and progressing our species without hurting other people, the planet or other animals. Until then, no I don't actually think the world needs religion, once we move into the age of technological dominance people will wonder why they ever believed in such dribble. In the real world, religion doesnt take the role of progressing anything, it does the exact opposite. We have these cretins going against common human interests, they spread AIDS in Africa and regulate currency unfairly within politics to help their religious and monetary bias. Unfortunately, we all live in a world with majorly unjust laws and presuppositions about the world that need to be demolished very soon.

If the younger and more scentifically inclined generation doesnt take over and change the Social and Monetary zeitgeist any time soon I'm afraid we wont be evolving much in the near future. No offense to old people but they mostly vote against the youth and say things like socialism is ok for us old folks but you youngins can work 3 jobs to afford the awesome medicade I get, fuck that... Worst case scenario we all go into another huge World War or have a nuke-off contest only to dwindle down to the dark ages of oppression again, ruining millions of years of evolution and thousands of years of scientific progression. We cant let it happen, the ideas of religion and deities in a dogmatic way, have to go.

[Minimalist]

Chuck is quite right. Edward Gibbons: The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

http://www.ccel.org/g/gibbon/decline/vol...p2.htm#PHI

Universal spirit of toleration.
I. The policy of the emperors and the senate, as far as it concerned religion, was happily seconded by the reflections of the enlightened, and by the habits of the superstitious, part of their subjects. The various modes of worship, which prevailed in the Roman world, were all considered by the people, as equally true; by the philosopher, as equally false; and by the magistrate, as equally useful. And thus toleration produced not only mutual indulgence, but even religious concord.

[Blam!]

The concept of "god" is a crucial belief of all of religion. However, Buddhism doesn't have god, but it has spiritual leader. Buddhists usually don't use "god" as a term to describe their spiritual leader.

I don't know much about Buddhism, so please correct me if I made an error. Anyway, the world is better off without religion. Besides, we're doing fine without religion, aren't we?

[Cosmic Ape]

The concept of "god" is a crucial belief of all of religion. However, Buddhism doesn't have god, but it has spiritual leader. Buddhists usually don't use "god" as a term to describe their spiritual leader.

I don't know much about Buddhism, so please correct me if I made an error. Anyway, the world is better off without religion. Besides, we're doing fine without religion, aren't we?

I tend to think that Buddists have generally benign beliefs even if they genuinely believe in karma. But for some of them, they consider the Dalai Lama to be godlike, kind of like how Christians treat the Pope or even their God. It even goes as far as the Dalai Lama supporters saying that a natural disaster happens because not enough people prayed or obeyed to the Dalai Lama. Same with Christians when they say we didnt pray enough to stop Jesus/God from sending a Hurricane to kill thousands of us.

[Anomalocaris]

The concept of "god" is a crucial belief of all of religion. However, Buddhism doesn't have god, but it has spiritual leader. Buddhists usually don't use "god" as a term to describe their spiritual leader.

I don't know much about Buddhism, so please correct me if I made an error. Anyway, the world is better off without religion. Besides, we're doing fine without religion, aren't we?

I don't believe the concept of god as some sentient entity with some anthropomorphic traits is crucial to religion. I think the concept of unimpeacheable revealed truth easily substitutes for such a god, and it is this concept that stands in place of god in the Buddhist religion.