Switching Religions, like switching toothpastes

If I may add this.

I was watching a show late last night on barracudas (not the car). These critters a perfect killing machines, yet, they have a flaw. These parasites can grow on their teeth, which can ultimately cause infections and harm the 'cuda. Nature has provided them with a dentist, these little fish called gobies. The cuda's line up taking turns and approach the spot where the gobies live, open their mouths and wait. If the cuda wanted to, it could clamp down on an easy meal. But it does not. Other cuda's could cut in line.. but they do not.

The point: We are adaptive social critters. We have a 'social contract' of sorts with others, which allows us to have a symbiotic relationship with other humans. Those whom have a parasitic relationship, (thieves for example) are shunned universally because they violate this contract.

We have used religion to explain this contract, by describing it as divine in origin, or what-have-you. That does not make it wrong. It is quite possible this was God's gift to man and some critters alike.

But I digress, I am just a young angry agnostic. So ignore me.

Anyways, back to work I go. Sorry for the lack of editing in advance.
 
I just want to clarify the interpretation of something I said earlier. I don't like the terminology "pre-programmed". That has a certain implication I don't want to follow. We are moral creatures at a fundamental ontological level, not because of programming, but by nature. I appreciate Fondren and mia's points above, and in reality don't think that we are too far off from each other, we are just approaching the subject from different philosophical perspectives. I think we all agree that morality is fundamental to our nature, in essence an inseparable part of what it means to be human. Netslave and I, I think, come from somewhat similar perspectives here, but let me nitpick one statement
In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
I highly recommend Michael Shermer's book The Science of Good and Evil because it gives an evolutionary biology and sociological explanation for morality. Shermer says we evolved morality within groups needed to survive--small tribes of 25-100 people--and established codes of conduct within the tribe and to other tribes. These were based on the trust needed to hunt in packs, exchange goods, and eventually specialize in skills. The Golden Rule "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is found in many cultures around the world.

This double standard of morality continued as people regrouped into different tribal distinctions. The "outsiders" group could be women, blacks, foreigners, the poor, the rich, infidels, etc. There were fewer moral standards in relating to the "other" than there was to your fellow tribe. Shermer says the march of human rights over the past century has been to say no, we're all part of the tribe. We're all part of the human tribe and we ought to treat each other like we would treat our fellow citizen, ethnicity, etc.
 
mia, I agree with what you are saying. I don't believe that purely the existence of a religion means that everything will be perfect. But I do believe that it is religion, or the religious belief, or faith, (however you want to say it) that is the origin for the morals we have. Good or bad. (Again, I stated that religious people actually can make mistakes)

Think about man and how we came about. Before we ever formed anything near what we consider today to be modern day society, I can't see, in a completely atheistic community, how it would have lasted more than just a couple of generations.

Social contracts aren't enough. Somebody will get greedy and start stealing, killing, etc. "For the benefit of all" isn't good enough to keep a society going.
 
I've never defended religious people who do bad things. I do however understand why they do them. Either they are liars to their faith, or they believe it to be right.

Maybe I'm not fully aware of the context but this is all so much dogmatic ********.

Religious people are people; they sin and do bad things. That does not mean they are liars to their faith (whatever that means) or that they believe what they are doing is right.
 
To be clear, netslave, your position is basically that a faith based belief structure (placing little if any value on the specific beliefs themselves) was an essential stabilizer for large scale human societies.
 
Also, I know that people sin and do bad things, but most of the examples brought up in threads like these are the religious fanatics that kill because they were directed to ....

Don't overlook the explanation that they are mentally unbalanced or suffering from Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. I don't know if you want to call those with TLE mentally unbalanced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top