Would the World be Better off Without Religion?

@neologist,

I rather have the tazer kind if it is not much to ask. I promise I wont break it.
Tell him I am very respectful of liers and have nothing against hypster bearded gods...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

I rather have the tazer kind if it is not much to ask. I promise I wont break it.
Tell him I am very respectful of liers and have nothing against hypster bearded gods...

You mean zaps?
First, try scuffing your feet on the carpet. There are atmospheric considerations which must be learned and evaluated. As you progress, purchase increasingly larger shoe sizes. Don't worry if you appear to be a clown. A2k is full of them.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

And who would have thunk you don't understand why!
Your reference to words like "religion" and "dogma" merely confirm that lack of understanding.

1 Reply

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

And who would have thunk you don't understand why!
Your reference to words like "religion" and "dogma" merely confirm that lack of understanding.

No need for that kind of slipping into the gutter, Fresco.

We can do this with a bit of class.

I was being ironic...and a tiny bit sarcastic, when I mentioned it was surprising that you agreed with JL.

You and he are normally in substantial agreement.

1 Reply

@neologist,

Got bored so soon...lacking stamina now Neo ?
...you got that last bit right...if one wants to address clowns one does clownish for languaging ! Wink

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

I’ve been of the opinion that religion has a net negative impact on humanity…but strangely enough, my gut-feeling answer to the thread question is: I don’t necessarily think so.

The world might be a better place without religion if only we humans were a bit further along in our philosophical evolution. But we are not.

Right now we are technologically evolved to the point where we COULD annihilate ourselves (annihilate almost all living creatures on the planet)…but we still haven’t evolved philosophically where such an event is unimaginable.

Hey…a huge asteroid could strike Earth and wipe out almost all the life…and the universe would have to live with it.

But I think religion, net negative impact that I see it being, does have a reasonable function for humanity…given that we are so relatively primitive. I think it does help keep us from being savages.

So…I am going to cast my vote for “NO”…even though I have reservations about that vote.

I think the opposite , I think that religion brought primative or war-like Humanity together to soon . Humanity , to me , needed to go through , perhaps, another thousand years of war to truly understand peace and the progress that would follow.

Religion brought civilization to soon to Humanity.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

You misunderstood entirely . The brain is one organ, but it helps to think of it as two different parts . The logic side sits next to God . It is the all knowing memory/emotional side . The side savants use . The logic side restricts it . For some this restriction means they cant believe in the emotional side . For others, not so much restriction and they can .

2 Replies

@fresco,

If "language is not representational", what is it? What is then the status of a phrase like "language is not representational"? Noise? Poetry? Posture?
Does it mean anything?

The idea is self-contradictory.

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

...sits next to God....

Where do Jesus and/or Gabriel sit ?

1 Reply

@fresco,

Jesus is a man and a great prophet, and Gabriel is an invention of Jewish priests . The whole concept of angels changes with time, like hell changes .

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I was being ironic...and a tiny bit sarcastic, when I mentioned it was surprising that you agreed with JL.

No you weren't! You were just a bit peeved because JLN suggested the emptiness of your mantra. and I reinforced that view.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

The whole concept of angels changes with time, like hell changes

....and the concept of "God" changes too....despite the psychological requirement for "His Permanence" !

1 Reply

@fresco,

Those are changes from society and religious leaders . The nature of having a need to believe stays the same .

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Agreed. Necessity is the mother of invention.

1 Reply

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

Necessity is the mother of invention.

Also, baribooboo gusmitak cruchwooo keek.

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Possibly I did misunderstand, Ionus. I apologize if I did.

But my reply holds.

There is no way one can come to "there is a God" through logic...just as there is no way one can come to "there are no gods" through logic.

1 Reply

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

Quote:
I was being ironic...and a tiny bit sarcastic, when I mentioned it was surprising that you agreed with JL.

No you weren't! You were just a bit peeved because JLN suggested the emptiness of your mantra. and I reinforced that view.

No I wasn't, Fresco.

I was being ironic...and a tiny bit sarcastic...just as I said I was.

There is nothing empty about what I have been saying.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

There is no way one can come to "there is a God" through logic..

I agree if you mean conscious thought logic .

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Yes you were. And Doris Day was the"class act", but your empty platitude has no chance no matter how often you sing it
Your turn...the choice is "tis so" or "no it aint", without the need for any explanatory work of course.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

Quote:
There is no way one can come to "there is a God" through logic..
I agree if you mean conscious thought logic .

I didn't mean Mickey Mouse logic...if that is what you were thinking, Ionus.

What were you thinking?

What kind of logic can get you to "there is a god" or "there are no gods?"

2 Replies

Would the World be Better off Without Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know