• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mass hysteria of early hominid self awareness led to the creation of religion.

soylentgreen said:
You give atheism far to much credit. People are quite capable of abstract thought. Atheism is merely a response to theism not a ban on thinking up weird stuff.
Read post 48 for your words in bold.

Interesting that we both see each other as the one who is secondary to physical phenomena.
Click to expand...

I’m not clear on whether you’re defending the atheist’s version of Occam’s Razor or not (“added complication”) so you may care to specify which devil you’re advocating for.
 
Deuce said:
Thank you for proving my suspicion about how you were drawing a line between spirituality and religion. You're very specifically defining it based on Christianity, and that's laughable. You're also just making up an entire belief structure based on cave paintings.
Click to expand...
Not at all. it was just an easy tie in to quote a line from your christian church which spells it out well. It is not difficult to find a correlation between religion and civilisation. Both need a means of control and that is what religion changed and does.
 
soylentgreen said:
Not at all. it was just an easy tie in to quote a line from your christian church which spells it out well. It is not difficult to find a correlation between religion and civilisation. Both need a means of control and that is what religion changed and does.
Click to expand...
"Dominion" is absolutely not a requirement to be a "religion" instead of "spirituality."

Odin was the ruler of all, not man.
 
Napoleon said:
Depends on the person. As Nietzsche pointed out, killing God set us adrift in an existence devoid of any meaning or purpose - unmoored to any objective truth or universal values. Camus and Sartre offered options for living with that but some people can’t face the truth so use religion as a form of escapism. Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...
Death of God originated in Hegel. Not that humans killed God but the very idea no longer had any power.
 
Ouroboros said:
I’m not clear on whether you’re defending the atheist’s version of Occam’s Razor or not (“added complication”) so you may care to specify which devil you’re advocating for.
Click to expand...
At this point I am simply pointing out that you appear to be assuming atheism is like theism, ie. a belief system. Of course it is not.
It serves one simple function as an attack on theism, nothing more.
I have no need to defend atheism. Just an ability to point out the flaws in religions and especially plato.
 
soylentgreen said:
At this point I am simply pointing out that you appear to be assuming atheism is like theism, ie. a belief system. Of course it is not.
It serves one simple function as an attack on theism, nothing more.
I have no need to defend atheism. Just an ability to point out the flaws in religions and especially plato.
Click to expand...
Disagree; atheism is a belief system. The belief is that the world of our perceptions is entirely explicable by material forces. The fact that this belief system arose to counter a system with the opposite paradigm-- that spiritual essence preceded material existence-- does not make atheism any less a belief system.

I appreciate the fact that the word "belief" has often been co-opted to mean "belief in a higher order," as in the slang word "believers." But in the sense that atheists are, unlike agnostics, utterly convinced that material forces explain everything, they too are believers.
 
Ouroboros said:
Disagree; atheism is a belief system. The belief is that the world of our perceptions is entirely explicable by material forces. The fact that this belief system arose to counter a system with the opposite paradigm-- that spiritual essence preceded material existence-- does not make atheism any less a belief system.

I appreciate the fact that the word "belief" has often been co-opted to mean "belief in a higher order," as in the slang word "believers." But in the sense that atheists are, unlike agnostics, utterly convinced that material forces explain everything, they too are believers.
Click to expand...
Not at all. For example in sweden they have a majority of atheists and also a majority that believe in elves. Atheism has nothing to do with materialism. It is merely a response to theism , nothing more.
 
I am not so sure that dogs and other animals do not have some level of self awareness - especially domesticated animals - but no doubt they are driven by instinct and do not bother themselves too much with concepts like good or bad etc. I would argue that instinct is our original sin and it still plagues us. When we ate the forbidden fruit we became self aware and realized that we were naked/driven by base instinct - and we were ashamed. There was no turning back and the ignorance that was the Garden of Eden was lost forever.

As far as why we invented religion I think it is as simple as us trying to give meaning to why bad things happen. We are members of a tribe and we have a great leader but one day he is struck by lightening. We mourn his death and we wonder why this terrible thing happened. Animals that are driven by instinct would perhaps mourn the death of a family member or pack member or whatever but they probably dont overthink things whereas us self aware humans probably do. So in trying to find meaning we come up with a greater power. If you look at Aboriginal Dreamtime religion its mostly Aboriginals trying to understand their world and give meaning to it. There is animalism through it that gives everything some spiritual essence. Romans had numina. Pretty similar. There is no link between the two - just a case of convergent evolution I would say. But yeah I think we invent religion to try to understand the world and give meaning to things. Im not so sure this was brought on by a 'hysteria' though.

What I think is interesting is the thought that developing into civilized beings will lead to some kind of higher or even collective consciousness as opposed to Call of the Wild/Might is Right type thinking that a return to instinct is the direction that humanity should take. Should we really be ashamed?

edit - Oh - and I am not so sure there is some great link between morality and religion. I tend to think that our concepts of morality were born on the battlefield or hunting ground.
 
soylentgreen said:
Not at all. For example in sweden they have a majority of atheists and also a majority that believe in elves. Atheism has nothing to do with materialism. It is merely a response to theism , nothing more.
Click to expand...
As you yourself said, atheism rests on discarding anything with theistic elements. The conviction that the world is comprehensible without such elements does not come out of nothing, but rests upon a conviction in materialism in one form or another.

Your Sweden assertion is unclear. Have you a link to what you're talking about?
 
Ouroboros said:
As you yourself said, atheism rests on discarding anything with theistic elements. The conviction that the world is comprehensible without such elements does not come out of nothing, but rests upon a conviction in materialism in one form or another.

Your Sweden assertion is unclear. Have you a link to what you're talking about?
Click to expand...
I would think it the other way around. The onus is always on the theist to give good reason and evidence of a god, not that of an an atheist to prove anything else.

In 2007, a survey conducted by Reykjavik University estimated that 62 per cent of the population believed in elves. Other studies since have suggested the figure is higher.
 
Channe79 said:
Imagine this: A human being no different than a dog that lives in the moment is dependent on nature, instinct, and has no thought of "self" or language. Then, through however means, the first human(s) somehow becomes self-aware of their own existence.

All of a sudden a being is now aware they exist but there are no words, thoughts, explanations, or history to explain what they are experiencing. I would assert the only logical reaction to this would have been hysteria. Wouldn't this reaction eventually give way to the rise of religion (God) that is the complete opposite of the hysteria the being was feeling.

Early man: Scared, unsure, purposeless, without a history, without a meaning, without a goal.
God: All powerful, all knowing, knows the past, present and future, has a goal for Itself and humanity.

This is my opinion. What say you ?
Click to expand...


What made the human somehow become aware of his existence?
 
soylentgreen said:
I would think it the other way around. The onus is always on the theist to give good reason and evidence of a god, not that of an an atheist to prove anything else.

In 2007, a survey conducted by Reykjavik University estimated that 62 per cent of the population believed in elves. Other studies since have suggested the figure is higher.
Click to expand...
Every atheist I've encountered is always rife with "proofs" that the physical world functions by materialistic principles, which conviction remains a reaction against theism; not an original conception.

I don't take surveys where people talk about elves seriously. If you want to think it means something, feel free.
 
Ouroboros said:
Every atheist I've encountered is always rife with "proofs" that the physical world functions by materialistic principles, which conviction remains a reaction against theism; not an original conception.

I don't take surveys where people talk about elves seriously. If you want to think it means something, feel free.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, there is enough evidence of a materialist world to be able to be rife with proof. Proof that I would only need if debating a theist.
 
Ouroboros said:
Every atheist I've encountered is always rife with "proofs" that the physical world functions by materialistic principles, which conviction remains a reaction against theism; not an original conception.
Click to expand...
I am an atheist and never make the argument that physicalism is proof God does not exist. The existence of God is real only as myth.
 
tosca1 said:
What made the human somehow become aware of his existence?
Click to expand...

I personally accept the Stoned Ape Theory of consciousness.
It makes a lot of sense that mind alternation mushrooms probably enhanced consciousness enough to reach sentiency.
 
soylentgreen said:
Well, yes, there is enough evidence of a materialist world to be able to be rife with proof. Proof that I would only need if debating a theist.
Click to expand...

Then you admit that atheists are dependent upon the concept of materialism. So glad we agree.
 
Jacksprat said:
I am an atheist and never make the argument that physicalism is proof God does not exist. The existence of God is real only as myth.
Click to expand...

So if I ask you “how did our shared physical universe come into bring,” you will reply, “I don’t know, but God had nothing to do with it.”
 
Ouroboros said:
So if I ask you “how did our shared physical universe come into bring,” you will reply, “I don’t know, but God had nothing to do with it.”
Click to expand...
The physical universe always existed. It had no beginning.
 
Jacksprat said:
The physical universe always existed. It had no beginning.
Click to expand...

I said “shared physical universe.” That should not connote to anyone a bunch of random atoms, because that is not the universe we share. We have a physical order right now; are you asserting that the order we share today has always existed?
 
Ouroboros said:
I said “shared physical universe.” That should not connote to anyone a bunch of random atoms, because that is not the universe we share. We have a physical order right now; are you asserting that the order we share today has always existed?
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
Jacksprat said:
Yes.
Click to expand...

Okay, so all the planets in the solar system have always been in precisely the same orderly arrangement that they are now?

I suspect you’re either not understanding the implications of your stated position or are just being oppugnant for the sake of oppugnancy.
 
Ouroboros said:
Okay, so all the planets in the solar system have always been in precisely the same orderly arrangement that they are now?

I suspect you’re either not understanding the implications of your stated position or are just being oppugnant for the sake of oppugnancy.
Click to expand...
Universe evolved from the big bang. Try and keep up with science.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom