What do we replace religion with?[W:675] (1 Viewer)

[Tim the plumber]

Feel better? LOL

Such incompetance.

Feel foolish?

 

[Divine_Wind]

Such incompetance.

Feel foolish?

Disagreed.

Negative. Why should I? You're the one who can't spell "incompetence". Get some help, Tim. You'll be happier for it.

 

[Prof_Lunaphiles]

I think we need a new philosophy of progress and responsibilty. Maybe JP is one of the herads of this process of creating such a thing.

Does anybody else have an input into the new philosophy of society?

Yes. The philosophy is the envisioning of a more just governing/corporate system - how decisions are made.

There is a "scientific way" of doing the decision making from the smallest organizations to the largest, and that it all needs to be coordinated and integrated using the techniques and communications technology that we have now, that they did not have in the past. When our corporate and government systems were established they did not have the demarcation of expertise that we have now to discriminate qualification standards for proper deliberation of decisions by juries of experts.

JP probably does not understand that the subsisting system is inadequately organized, and dependent on the bending of rules. An improved system is going to be introduced with a more sophisticated game theory.

 

[NWO_Spook]

I was watching this video by Jordan Peterson;

J. Peterson is an idiot.

The gist is that the civilization we have is founded upon Christian principals. And that by abandoning this religion we will create a civilization that simply does not function.

And this is why. History shows that a society can be both religious and dysfunctional. It is merely an assumption to believe that without religion, we decline in to decadence or barbarism.

I can see his point. The present philosophy of business is the MBA. In that lying is something you do in your actions all the time. You expect others to do it. You live the life of the slippery slope.

Corporate practices are often unethical and do not require a religious or non-religious society to be sustained. I wouldn't use that as an example.

This is, I think the exact opposite of how I, an atheist, wish to live.

Of course, as atheists are some of the most moral individuals I've ever met or observed. We, as a rule, abhor unethical and immoral practices (I await the first to bring up communism etc. without realising that these people were desperate to replace one false ideology with another).

The truth and disiple of not cheating or swindling others is what I want my life to be about.

As it should, but I do not believe for a moment that we require the threat of punishment from an imaginary deity in order to promote ethical and moral behaviour.

I think we need a new philosophy of progress and responsibilty.

How do we implement thus? When I see statements like that I wonder how many will die in the transitional process.

Maybe JP is one of the herads of this process of creating such a thing.

I truly doubt that.

Does anybody else have an input into the new philosophy of society?

One can ascribe to the tenets of Jesus (or any other ethical and moral historical figure) without being religious. I live by the code of doing unto others as one would expect for one's self, and this can be applied universally. One doesn't need to believe in the mythical Jesus (as opposed to the historical) for this philosophy to apply. We do not need elaborate constructs.

 

[Tim the plumber]

J. Peterson is an idiot.



And this is why. History shows that a society can be both religious and dysfunctional. It is merely an assumption to believe that without religion, we decline in to decadence or barbarism.



Corporate practices are often unethical and do not require a religious or non-religious society to be sustained. I wouldn't use that as an example.



Of course, as atheists are some of the most moral individuals I've ever met or observed. We, as a rule, abhor unethical and immoral practices (I await the first to bring up communism etc. without realising that these people were desperate to replace one false ideology with another).



As it should, but I do not believe for a moment that we require the threat of punishment from an imaginary deity in order to promote ethical and moral behaviour.



How do we implement thus? When I see statements like that I wonder how many will die in the transitional process.



I truly doubt that.



One can ascribe to the tenets of Jesus (or any other ethical and moral historical figure) without being religious. I live by the code of doing unto others as one would expect for one's self, and this can be applied universally. One doesn't need to believe in the mythical Jesus (as opposed to the historical) for this philosophy to apply. We do not need elaborate constructs.

I agree. But we do need some sort of construct. Something more than do unto others as you would want them to do to you.

That is the hole I think needs to be filled.

I don't think pure sciency sounding stuff will do. It has to sound philosophic...

 

[devildavid]

In general, religion has already been replaced. Not that religion was ever really the glue that held societies together. Tribalism and nationalism are often what keeps societies organized. Religion stripped of political power is a sideshow. Mankind is good at making up values to coalesce around.

 

[Tim the plumber]

In general, religion has already been replaced. Not that religion was ever really the glue that held societies together. Tribalism and nationalism are often what keeps societies organized. Religion stripped of political power is a sideshow. Mankind is good at making up values to coalesce around.

Yes. I would like it if we could actually choose the values we end up coalescing around. How do we do that?

 

[devildavid]

Yes. I would like it if we could actually choose the values we end up coalescing around. How do we do that?

We don't. It happens randomly. It all depends on which values appear to promote and advance our particular group/tribe/society.

 

[Tim the plumber]

We don't. It happens randomly. It all depends on which values appear to promote and advance our particular group/tribe/society.

I strongly suspect there is a lot less randomness in it than you think. I suspect that various interest groups push for things with differing levels of success.

I want to do my own pushing. It would be good to have a decent philosophy as the prop(?) to get behind.

 

[Hawkins]

Yes. I would like it if we could actually choose the values we end up coalescing around. How do we do that?

Religion exists due mainly to an advocate about whether life continues to exist after death. Since no human knows for sure, not a single one, thus everyone literally has a religion as a common belief shared by humans with a similar thought. Science won't help that much because science is basically observation and experiment based. Long before the emergence of science, humans already defined that whatever spiritual doesn't lie in our space/time, including gods, ghosts souls/spirits and etc.. It means we humans can't "go there" to gather scientific evidence. In the end, it boils down to one's faith to believe whether they exist or not.

Everyone has a faith on whether life continues simply because 1) you don't know for sure, and 2) it concerns your life. You don't think that you need to consider the possibility of what could possibly happen because you assume that nothing happens more likely developed from the absence of evidence. Humans have the basic instinct of concerning own life unless you assume it won't go beyond the point of death. This is where your faith is, perhaps without your own awareness (possibly as a result of your faith being firmly developed through education and out of the fallacy that the absence of evidence being the evidence of absence).

Everyone has a religion, whether you realize it yourself or not. Religion thus will not die away. It just changes forms from one way to another, until humans can know for sure what death is.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Religion exists due mainly to an advocate about whether life continues to exist after death. Since no human knows for sure, not a single one, thus everyone literally has a religion as a common belief shared by humans with a similar thought. Science won't help that much because science is basically observation and experiment based. Long before the emergence of science, humans already defined that whatever spiritual doesn't lie in our space/time, including gods, ghosts souls/spirits and etc.. It means we humans can't "go there" to gather scientific evidence. In the end, it boils down to one's faith to believe whether they exist or not.

Actually the after life was a comparatively late subject for religion. Lots of early religions did not talk about it.

Everyone has a faith on whether life continues simply because 1) you don't know for sure, and 2) it concerns your life. You don't think that you need to consider the possibility of what could possibly happen because you assume that nothing happens more likely developed from the absence of evidence. Humans have the basic instinct of concerning own life unless you assume it won't go beyond the point of death. This is where your faith is, perhaps without your own awareness (possibly as a result of your faith being firmly developed through education and out of the fallacy that the absence of evidence being the evidence of absence).

Eh??

Everyone has a religion, whether you realize it yourself or not. Religion thus will not die away. It just changes forms from one way to another, until humans can know for sure what death is.

Nope. I don't have a religion.

I know you desperately want me to have one but I don't.

 

[Omega Man]

Actually the after life was a comparatively late subject for religion. Lots of early religions did not talk about it..[/COLOR]

Yep. Religion itself is rooted in superstitious cultural systems driven by a collective need to understand and survive the elements. Why is there darkness? Why does the lightning bring thunder? Why does the weather change? Where do floods come from? What have we done to bring all this upon ourselves? Why are the gods so angry with us?


OM

 

[Tim the plumber]

Yep. Religion itself is rooted in superstitious cultural systems driven by a collective need to understand and survive the elements. Why is there darkness? Why does the lightning bring thunder? Why does the weather change? Where do floods come from? What have we done to bring all this upon ourselves? Why are the gods so angry with us?


OM

Religion has use any and all ideas to enmesh its' self into all aspects of society and thinking.

Just because we have stepped beyond the need to bring in the Great Sky Fairies to explain the world does not mean that there is not something we have thrown out with the bath water that we would benefit from.

 

[devildavid]

Religion has use any and all ideas to enmesh its' self into all aspects of society and thinking.

Just because we have stepped beyond the need to bring in the Great Sky Fairies to explain the world does not mean that there is not something we have thrown out with the bath water that we would benefit from.

The problem is that religion is all bath water. It relies on everything being backed up by some god given moral code independent of man's own made up moral codes. Remove the god and there is zero basis for any universal moral code.

 

[devildavid]

I strongly suspect there is a lot less randomness in it than you think. I suspect that various interest groups push for things with differing levels of success.

I want to do my own pushing. It would be good to have a decent philosophy as the prop(?) to get behind.

There is nothing to get behind that would not include your own personal self interest. And that alone should make you very suspicious of anyone's motivation for coming up with what they consider a decent philosophy. It is a constant struggle that will never end. Everyone wants to work toward their idea of the best society but we will never be of one mind on what it is. Hence the crazy mixed up history of the human race.

 

[Tim the plumber]

The problem is that religion is all bath water. It relies on everything being backed up by some god given moral code independent of man's own made up moral codes. Remove the god and there is zero basis for any universal moral code.

I disagree. The principal of do unto others etc can be extended a long way.

But I think we need a more fleshed out guide thingy.

 

[devildavid]

I disagree. The principal of do unto others etc can be extended a long way.

But I think we need a more fleshed out guide thingy.

The principal of do unto others is flawed. Some people enjoy violent activity, even when it puts them in harm's way. Some people are sado-masochists. Some people are sociopaths, They cannot apply do unto others in the way that others would who don't share those traits.

Also, do unto others is not unique to religion.

We cannot flesh it out, because that is exactly the point where disagreement begins. There is no universally accepted code of behavior. There are just the transitory codes we generally accept at each point in history. And it will never stop changing.

 

[distraff]

I was watching this video by Jordan Peterson;

YouTube

The gist is that the civilization we have is founded upon Christian principals. And that by abandoning this religion we will create a civilization that simply does not function.

I can see his point. The present philosophy of business is the MBA. In that lying is something you do in your actions all the time. You expect others to do it. You live the life of the slippery slope.

This is, I think the exact opposite of how I, an atheist, wish to live.

The truth and disiple of not cheating or swindling others is what I want my life to be about.

I think we need a new philosophy of progress and responsibilty. Maybe JP is one of the herads of this process of creating such a thing.

Does anybody else have an input into the new philosophy of society?

Well Western Europe and Eastern Asia function very well while being mostly non-religious and have the lowest crime rates in the world. It turns out morality is built into humans and doesn't come from religion.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Well Western Europe and Eastern Asia function very well while being mostly non-religious and have the lowest crime rates in the world. It turns out morality is built into humans and doesn't come from religion.

Yes. That is very true but we also seem to need some sort of guiding rule book/philosophy. Look at how powerful Mao's little red book was. It filled a gap in our social needs.

 

[devildavid]

Yes. That is very true but we also seem to need some sort of guiding rule book/philosophy. Look at how powerful Mao's little red book was. It filled a gap in our social needs.

We need it for what end? What do you think happens without it?

 

[Daisy]

Yes. That is very true but we also seem to need some sort of guiding rule book/philosophy. Look at how powerful Mao's little red book was. It filled a gap in our social needs.

With that one comment, you're pretty much acknowledging what Jeremiah said a long time ago...Jeremiah 10:23...and most people will agree, the Bible has much more power and is much more far reaching than any other book ever written...

 

[marke]

Yep. Religion itself is rooted in superstitious cultural systems driven by a collective need to understand and survive the elements. Why is there darkness? Why does the lightning bring thunder? Why does the weather change? Where do floods come from? What have we done to bring all this upon ourselves? Why are the gods so angry with us?

OM

Secular Humanism is rooted in science fiction foolishness. Humanists believe humans descended from dumb animals by a dead process which was never observed, cannot be proven, and is only believed by blind faith in the nonsensical. Humanists mock the idea that God created the heavens and earth and yet Humanists have no clue how matter and energy originated from nothing in the beginning without God.

 

[Tim the plumber]

We need it for what end? What do you think happens without it?

I think there is a lack of confidence and direction among our society.

 

[Tim the plumber]

With that one comment, you're pretty much acknowledging what Jeremiah said a long time ago...Jeremiah 10:23...and most people will agree, the Bible has much more power and is much more far reaching than any other book ever written...

That does not make it right.

I want a better book than a load of old fables.

 

[distraff]

Yes. That is very true but we also seem to need some sort of guiding rule book/philosophy. Look at how powerful Mao's little red book was. It filled a gap in our social needs.

At the time of Mao China was highly religious the biggest religious being Buddhism. The book gained popularity because of social and political ills of China not lack of religion. I suggest you read Animal Farm to really understand why communism spreads.