The function of religion ?

[Luno]

Great round up Rassah: About the last part. Sure Christianity have put it's name to a lot of murder and oppression through history. What I was talking about was the equality, enlightment movement in Europe in the 17'th century. It was a secular revolution which in some sense also was against the church, but also a continuation of Martin Luther's reformation. human rights, women rights. Fair trial practices, parliamentarism, is in essence the implementation of the Christian equality ethics in society.

[1714966496]

1714966496

[1714966496]

1714966496

[1714966496]

1714966496

[Jimmy Chang(y)]

With regards to the history of Islam, I found this very interesting: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/islam-the-untold-story

Well worth a watch if you have the time

[Luno]

Thanks Chang, I don't have a UK IP so I can not watch this.

I myself, would love to know more about early Islamic history. The funny thing is that Paulus in christanity also had dictations "from God" but he is considered the author, but in Islam Suggesting that there are variations between early sources of the Quran, thus some kind of author involved, is strongly blasfemic.

There are some early Qurans and papers in existence found in odd places, some have been published others are kept under lock. The Vatican has done the the same thing, deciding which sources should be public and be part of the bible, but historians have access to most of it, we think.

We need more Islamic religion historians, it would be a great gift to Muslims and the world.

Reading up on Tom holland

[dancupid]

Function of organised religion is control. Its tools are violence, ignorance, fear and guilt.

AKA 'Survival of the fittest' or Darwinism - same thing.
Religion is not independent of the natural world - it's clearly part of the natural world (otherwise it wouldn't exist).
If you believe it's something beyond nature then your beliefs are the same as religion - they are invoking something supernatural and outside of nature.
If you want to defeat it then breed.

[Luno]

The question why to believe, is more important than the what to believe.

[foggyb]

If there truly was no God, there would be a vocal majority of people who would testify that their ancestors never told any such stories of creation or God. Where are these people? I cannot recall to mind any society which does not have some form of creation and God legends in their history.

If there were such a society, and there was indeed no God, they would flourish unimpeded by the advantages of not "wasting" time and resources with religion, to dominate the whole world. Eventually eradicating all religious beliefs entirely.

Such a society would be too focused on happily living their lives and trying to make their lives better (like the modern secular countries, and unlike the modern religious countries), NOT trying to dominate others. On the other hand,
Christianity/Judaism/Islam wasted a lot of resources trying to figure out how to torture and kill anyone who didn't believe in their crap. So obviously the group that believes in illogical crap that tell them to kill others because a magic sky voice told them to will eradicate the rational society that believes people should be left alone to live however they want.

Where is this happy, God-free, advantaged, humanistic society? If what atheism offers is truly better, why is it that all theists haven't disappeared? After all, they just need to listen to reason to be converted. Atheism must not be as reasonable or rational as you suggest. Atheism is estimated to have a following of about 2% of world population overall. The vast minority is telling the majority they aren't rational? Something is wrong with that picture.

Why does evolution supposedly insist on keeping the 'religious gene' in place? If evolution has produced its best work in sorting out the ideal creature, why are you arguing against theism? Accept it. It must be good!

You believe Islam follows the true God? Painting Christians and Islamist with the same violent brush is extreme. Ignorant at best.

There is a God, he allows willful disbelief, and doesn't force anyone. This is what we see in modern society.

[bb113]

If there truly was no God, there would be a vocal majority of people who would testify that their ancestors never told any such stories of creation or God. Where are these people? I cannot recall to mind any society which does not have some form of creation and God legends in their history.

If there were such a society, and there was indeed no God, they would flourish unimpeded by the advantages of not "wasting" time and resources with religion, to dominate the whole world. Eventually eradicating all religious beliefs entirely.

Such a society would be too focused on happily living their lives and trying to make their lives better (like the modern secular countries, and unlike the modern religious countries), NOT trying to dominate others. On the other hand,
Christianity/Judaism/Islam wasted a lot of resources trying to figure out how to torture and kill anyone who didn't believe in their crap. So obviously the group that believes in illogical crap that tell them to kill others because a magic sky voice told them to will eradicate the rational society that believes people should be left alone to live however they want.

Where is this happy, God-free, advantaged, humanistic society? If what atheism offers is truly better, why is it that all theists haven't disappeared? After all, they just need to listen to reason to be converted. Atheism must not be as reasonable or rational as you suggest. Atheism is estimated to have a following of about 2% of world population overall. The vast minority is telling the majority they aren't rational? Something is wrong with that picture.

Why does evolution supposedly insist on keeping the 'religious gene' in place? If evolution has produced its best work in sorting out the ideal creature, why are you arguing against theism? Accept it. It must be good!

You believe Islam follows the true God? Painting Christians and Islamist with the same violent brush is extreme. Ignorant at best.

There is a God, he allows willful disbelief, and doesn't force anyone to believe. This is what we see in modern society.

People have been bred to have the "religious gene", it makes them easier to manipulate.

[foggyb]

People have been bred to have the "religious gene", it makes them easier to manipulate.

Where did it come from in the first place? Malicious aliens meddling with DNA?

If God exists, obviously he would create in us the ability to appreciate him.

Human designers would kill to have this ability in their own creations.

[bb113]

People have been bred to have the "religious gene", it makes them easier to manipulate.

Where did it come from in the first place? Malicious aliens meddling with DNA?

If God exists, obviously he would create in us the ability to appreciate him.

Human designers would kill to have this ability in their own creations.

The ability to trust others when they give magical explanations for things is vestigial trait from childhood that has been extended into adulthood. It is good for a child to possess this trait since they have so much less knowledge of the world than the person telling them what to do and so would not understand more complicated explanations. The process is called neoteny. It is common amongst domesticated animals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoteny

[myrkul]

why is it that all theists haven't disappeared?

they just need to listen to reason to be converted.

Well, there's yer problem, right there.

[foggyb]

The ability to trust others when they give magical explanations for things is vestigial trait from childhood that has been extended into adulthood. It is good for a child to possess this trait since they have so much less knowledge of the world than the person telling them what to do and so would not understand more complicated explanations. The process is called neoteny. It is common amongst domesticated animals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoteny

The most magical explanation of all is (the theory of) evolution. The atheist boldy claims "Evolution did it, see, here's the evidence".

Yes, yes but HOW? Evolution is a theory, not a process. It lives in the imagination only. Magic.

[foggyb]

why is it that all theists haven't disappeared?

they just need to listen to reason to be converted.

Well, there's yer problem, right there.

Atheism isn't reasonable or rational. Otherwise atheists would make up the majority.

Human beings are generally quite rational. The argument for God is much more rational than the argument against.

[bb113]

The ability to trust others when they give magical explanations for things is vestigial trait from childhood that has been extended into adulthood. It is good for a child to possess this trait since they have so much less knowledge of the world than the person telling them what to do and so would not understand more complicated explanations. The process is called neoteny. It is common amongst domesticated animals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoteny

The most magical explanation of all is (the theory of) evolution. The atheist boldy claims "Evolution did it, see, here's the evidence".

Yes, yes but HOW? Evolution is a theory, not a process. It lives in the imagination only. Magic.

I'm not sure what you are asking. What are you seeking an explanation for?

Another thing is that the theory of evolution is indeed a magical explanation to most people (ie "sufficently advanced tech is indistinguishable from magic"). Trusting the magical explanations of others is advantageous in complex, specialized societies, which is why we are bred to do it. If there are multiple competing explanations, in the end it boils down to the individual choosing based on a combination of argument from authority and argument from consensus. So the important thing is how to make the choice of authorities and peer groups.

[foggyb]

The most magical explanation of all is (the theory of) evolution. The atheist boldy claims "Evolution did it, see, here's the evidence".

Yes, yes but HOW? Evolution is a theory, not a process. It lives in the imagination only. Magic.

I'm not sure what you are asking. What are you seeking an explanation for?

Another thing is that the theory of evolution is indeed a magical explanation to most people (ie "sufficently advanced tech is indistinguishable from magic"). Trusting the magical explanations of others is advantageous in complex, specialized societies, which is why we are bred to do it. If there are multiple competing explanations, in the end it boils down to the individual choosing based on a combination of argument from authority and argument from consensus. So the important thing is how to make the choice of authorities and peer groups.

I'm not arguing that evolution appears to be magical, i'm saying it HAS to be magical because it is not driven by any reasonable, rational, engineering intelligence.

I'm not seeking an explanation, I KNOW evolution can't create a working eye, a perfect heart and circulation system, etc. Its simply a process of reasoning. The mathematical odds are impossible, for random chance (even guided random chance) forming a non-trivial biological system. Yet the claims are not only that evolution does create these systems, but that they work. That's the most magical element of all.

[bb113]

I'm not arguing that evolution appears to be magical, i'm saying it HAS to be magical because it is not driven by any reasonable, rational, engineering intelligence.

I'm not seeking an explanation, I KNOW evolution can't create a working eye, a perfect heart and circulation system, etc. Its simply a process of reasoning. The mathematical odds are impossible, for random chance (even guided random chance) forming a non-trivial biological system. Yet the claims are not only that evolution does create these systems, but that they work. That's the most magical element of all.

Please write out each step of your reasoning and how you calculated the mathematical odds so that others can make sure there are no errors. I would also like to KNOW the truth, but unfortunately am limited to comparing the plausibility of different explanations using my prior experiences as a guide.

[myrkul]

why is it that all theists haven't disappeared?

they just need to listen to reason to be converted.

Well, there's yer problem, right there.

Atheism isn't reasonable or rational. Otherwise atheists would make up the majority.

Human beings are generally quite rational. The argument for God is much more rational than the argument against.

People who believe in magical cloud-people are, by definition, not rational. The argument for God is, by definition, not rational. Evolution is a well-understood process. Scientists have already created 80-90% of the chemicals and structures needed to form early life simply by replicating the conditions of the early earth. Simple chemistry, no magical cloud-man required.

Human beings are generally irrational idiots.

[foggyb]

Please write out each step of your reasoning and how you calculated the mathematical odds so that others can make sure there are no errors. I would also like to KNOW the truth, but unfortunately am limited to comparing the plausibility of different explanations using my prior experiences as a guide.

I'll be happy to do that, if you write out the steps evolution took as it created a working eye. I can't find any solid data on that. Include references to peer-reviewed studies.

People who believe in magical cloud-people are, by definition, not rational. The argument for God is, by definition, not rational. Evolution is a well-understood process. Scientists have already created 80-90% of the chemicals and structures needed to form early life simply by replicating the conditions of the early earth. Simple chemistry, no magical cloud-man required.

Human beings are generally irrational idiots.

What you're saying is that anyone who suggests the existence of supernatural power, is irrational. Your call to shut down reason has nothing to do with rationality, its pure religion. Science has under no circumstances ever ruled out the possibility of a supernatural creator God. Science cannot tell us anything about the supernatural because science is a method for investigating ONLY the natural (ie physical matter).

Evolution is a theory and has never been replicated in a laboratory.

If scientists created "80-90% of the chemicals and structures needed to form early life", that only furthers the hypothesis that it requires intelligent engineering to bring about.

Furthermore, they only guess at the conditions of the early earth. There is no science that can tell what the conditions were like, because science relies on observation.

I'm sorry you hold such a dim view of your fellow humans.

[Rassah]

If there truly was no God, there would be a vocal majority of people who would testify that their ancestors never told any such stories of creation or God. Where are these people? I cannot recall to mind any society which does not have some form of creation and God legends in their history.

If there were such a society, and there was indeed no God, they would flourish unimpeded by the advantages of not "wasting" time and resources with religion, to dominate the whole world. Eventually eradicating all religious beliefs entirely.

Such a society would be too focused on happily living their lives and trying to make their lives better (like the modern secular countries, and unlike the modern religious countries), NOT trying to dominate others. On the other hand,
Christianity/Judaism/Islam wasted a lot of resources trying to figure out how to torture and kill anyone who didn't believe in their crap. So obviously the group that believes in illogical crap that tell them to kill others because a magic sky voice told them to will eradicate the rational society that believes people should be left alone to live however they want.

Where is this happy, God-free, advantaged, humanistic society?

As I said already, they were all killed off by Christians and other religious types. Most during the Dark Ages.

[Rassah]

Evolution is a theory, not a process.

Actually, evolution is by definition a process. The theory is the explanation of how that process works.

I'll be happy to do that, if you write out the steps evolution took as it created a working eye. I can't find any solid data on that. Include references to peer-reviewed studies.

I won't do any searching for you (you can find your own references), but here is how the eye happened:
1) some species developed cells on their skin that were sensitive to light. All they could feel was whether they were in a light or a dark area. There are examples of species living today that have patches of skin sensitive to light. Likely this allows them to hide, and tell if they have hidden themselves well enough.
2) The light sensitive patches progressed to be inside of a small dimple. Species with dimples containing those sensitive cells can survive better than those without, since they can not only feel the light, they can somewhat tell where it's coming from, based on which side of the dimple is lit up
3) The dimples progressively get deeper and deeper, thus giving more precision for feeling where the light comes from
4) Eventually the dimple would form into the best method for telling EXACTLY where the light is coming from, which is a hollow sphere with a pinhole towards the outside. This would mean the direction of the light would leave a precise spot on the inside of that sphere.
5) Next step would be some cells becoming sensitive enough to distinguish shades of that light. Cells being able to differentiate between bright light, dim light, and no light, is being able to "see" in black and white
6) Eventually the pinhole got covered by a membrane that would protect the primitive eye from getting junk inside
7) From there, you have your basic primitive eyeball, with the only improvements needed being the different types of light-sensitive cells that can detect different colors, and the membrane being able to focus the light a bit better to give better resolution images to those cells.
There you go. Your eyeball isn't magic.

Science has under no circumstances ever ruled out the possibility of a supernatural creator God. Science cannot tell us anything about the supernatural because science is a method for investigating ONLY the natural (ie physical matter).

Absolutely true. Which makes the supernatural irrelevant. If god, and the supernatural, has no means of being tested scientifically, because it can not affect the natural or the physical in any way, they why even take it into consideration? It would be no more rational for someone to believe in a supernatural god than it would be for the to believe in anything else that's supernatural (e.g. Chtulu, Thor, Santa Claus, etc)

Evolution is a theory and has never been replicated in a laboratory.

You are VERY wrong there. Evolution is constantly created in laboratories. It's how we make medicines, test drug effectiveness on bacteria, and even create new types of foods and animals. The common household banana is the product of human guided evolution, where the guidance was based on the flavor we want, as opposed to natural guidance for survival (hardiness againt temperatures, weather, or predators)

If scientists created "80-90% of the chemicals and structures needed to form early life", that only furthers the hypothesis that it requires intelligent engineering to bring about.

Actually, just about 40 years scientists were only able to create about 20-30% of the chemical structures, so the only thing this furthers is that your god has only 10% of "hypothesis" to hold on to. In another 10 years he'll only have 5%, and in another 10 after that, he'll have no room left.

Furthermore, they only guess at the conditions of the early earth. There is no science that can tell what the conditions were like, because science relies on observation.

There is science, and it is based on observation. We can see exactly what early earth conditions were like by looking at rocks way deep underground, which show exactly what the air was made of, what kind of weather there was, and what kind of activity was happening on the surface, from chemicals, to water flows, to lightning strikes.

NOT that any of this will matter to you, obviously, since, if you think magic can be a rational explanation, the concept of rationality itself is foreign to you.

[bb113]

Please write out each step of your reasoning and how you calculated the mathematical odds so that others can make sure there are no errors. I would also like to KNOW the truth, but unfortunately am limited to comparing the plausibility of different explanations using my prior experiences as a guide.

I'll be happy to do that, if you write out the steps evolution took as it created a working eye. I can't find any solid data on that. Include references to peer-reviewed studies.

So, Rassah has put forward a reasonable sequence of events, but I don't think that is what is important here. The important thing is to realize the difference between "KNOWING" and comparing how plausible different scenarios are. Anyone who says they KNOW anything is full of themselves, it indicates unreasonable confidence in their prior experiences. I suppose Baye's rule is my equivalent to God.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes%27_theorem