Why We Need Religion

[_Mr. Coffee]

Natural predators? Well now perhaps only ourselves

If you tallied up the number of people that died as a result of another person intentionally killing them and put it up against total mortality rate for the 20th century, you'd notice that other people aren't even in the top five causes of death for humans.

and some microscopic predators.

Getting close... But thanks to modern medicine and nutrition, diseases that once culled the herd are not only treatable, in a lot of cases we've managed to eradicate the threat entirely (SmallPox or Polio ring any bells?). Also, because of modern medicine a lot of wounds where once you would have eventually died from infection are no longer life threatening (Peniciline much?).

These days, unless you live in an undeveloped nation, microbes aren't much of a threat.

For example, thanks to modern medicine I'm immune to TB, Anthrax, Small Pox, Polio, and all but the most virualent strians of the Flu. Turns out all those vaccinations I got in the Marines still work very well as I haven't even had so much as a case of the sniffles in over fifteen years now. Although I wouldn't want to test it, I'm willing to bet I couldn't catch the clap in a Thai whore house thanks to all the vaccinations I've had over the years.

In our early years lions tigers bears wolves hyenas etc would have all be serious threats. I think a critical event in our history was when our forebearers started taking the risks of leaving the safty of trees. One person and a lion, the person is prey. Three or four people with spears and the lion is prey. Cooperation and violence founding our race.

It was our ability to use tools combined with binocular vision, social skills, and intelligence that did it. The most important of these was and still is our ability to use tools to adapt to our environment far more rapidly than any natural evolutionary process can keep up with.

[_ajax18]

I have had a much happier and emotionally fulfilling life as an atheist than I ever had as a theist of any sort, including Mormon. I was so pre-occupied and worried about God - what he wanted from me, how to "have a relationship" with him, and whether I was "good enough" to merit seeing him again one day - and so stressed about not feeling "good enough" - that I was much more prone to depression as a believer than as an atheist.

I'll definitely admit that when I stepped away from Church a bit I was much happier for the time being. Religion seemed to be driving me nuts and the only thing the Church leaders could do about that was blame me for it. Maybe it was my fault but all I knew was it was driving me nuts and I had to get away from it to remain sane. The mission was tough to hack through especially in the beginning. I don't envy you guys having to knock doors in developed countries. Thankfully in South America I only did that once and it I did it for fun. Yet even when you're teaching all the time, people can never do everything you ask them to, therefore your leaders are going to give you a hard time regardless. So believe me when I say it can still drive you nuts.

In any event it seems that you've had a similar experience of being able to appreciate some of obvious good things in life once you got out from under religion. I think that's a good thing.

Yet I still have a desire for the existential questions that religion and particulary Mormonism as taught in it fulness by Joseph Smith before they started watering it down, answers. I think if I pick and choose the right parts and basically take on cafeteria Mormonism I could be more at peace than with no God. Religion has offered me peace that an alone in the universe could not provide. I'll definitely admit that I was happier in the right now when I deicded to distance myself from the Church. I take issue with Mormons who claim Church activity somehow makes them happier now and you don't have to wait for eternity. It never did that for me. As a matter of fact the more strictly I practiced it, the more unhappy I became. It only gave me more hope in the future than I previously had. I'm just not sure if I like organized religion and can incorporate it right now, but I'll probably always be a believer in the supernatural. It solves too many daily philosophical problems for me to give it up. To me it just means believing that the greatest good I can conceive does exist.

[_ajax18]

Just because committing suicide has no eternal consequence, how is that a reason to do it?

What do you think of Dr. Kevorkian?

[_ajax18]

The penal system doesn't seem to do a very good job as a preventative.

Exactly. Sometimes I am really tempted by the idea of no religion. I'd start by taking on a policy of, "You mistreat me, I'll get even one way or another." Look out town of Lago, AZ. Ajax is riding into town on a white horse called, "Death!"

[Doctor Steuss]

...but I also think that Log may not be able to help it to some degree (he has all but admitted to having asperger's).

Interesting.

Now what's the story with YH8?

LOL

[_asbestosman]

Now what's the story with YH8?

The gig's up. He's seen through to the nefarious schemes of "sciegion".

In all seriousness I have no clue what's up with YH8. If some of you are right about the incompatibility of Mormonism and evolution, then perhaps he (and Log) is more consistant than I am as far as worldviews go. I remember Richard Dawkins talking about a really smart biologist who discarded evolution for that reason. While ultimately I think there's a good explanation to reconcile the evidence of evolution with Mormonism, perhaps it's best for me that I'm ignorant enough to not see the real conflict in the first place.

[_DonBradley]

Theists who believe that atheism equals the justification for following whatever whim strikes us are actually revealing something about themselves: what kind of person they would be as an atheist.

I doubt it, Beastie. I used to believe that morality depended on the existence of God--many, if not most, of those who move from theism to atheism once held such a belief. But when the actual transition occurs, lo and behold, they don't become serial killers--or even "bad people"! An argument like Log's is pure rhetoric. He may present it sincerely, but it has no basis in reality, including the reality of human nature and his own being. The moral sense evolved as part and parcel of human nature long before God beliefs were invented, and when God beliefs die, the moral sense, like the rest of human nature, lives on.

I do agree that human beings have a kind of innate need for spirituality and community, and that non-theists need to more fully address this need; but I disagree sharply that traditional religion is the only thing between us and moral chaos. If this were true, atheistic groups and nations like the National Academy of Sciences and Sweden, respectively, would be the moral equivalent of hell. In fact, nothing could be further from reality. These groups are exceptional in their absence of criminality and moral decay.

Don

[_dartagnan]

The moral sense evolved as part and parcel of human nature long before God beliefs were invented, and when God beliefs die, the moral sense, like the rest of human nature, lives on.

I don't see how this assertion could be in any sense supported. Since before religion? That is a hell of a long time ago to make such statements, and atheism has become only a relatively recent phenomenon as a movement with any kind of political sway. Throughout most of recorded history, no matter how far back one goes, religion is seeped in every facet of human society. In fact, the further back one goes, the more prominent a role religion plays and the harder it is to find atheism. If you were an atheist during the dark ages, for example, you were the odd ball, and from a sociological point of view, it would have been better to keep it to yourself.

However, it cannot be ignored that many of the moral leaps human society has made over the course of history has been led by those dastardly religious fanatics. Whether it be the abondoning of slavery or the strive for human rights throughout the world, it wasn't the atheist who was behind these endeavors.

Why not if what you say is true, and humans without religion are just as inclined to strive for moral causes?

And according to most Christians, even atheists have the spirit or the "light of Christ" (Mormon view) to some extent, which explains why they don't always act immorally. The Apostle Paul implied that by simply being human we are confronted with too much evidence that God exists.

It seems to me that most atheists are essentially moral people, not because they fear divine retribution in the hereafter. I think they are essentially moral because of what Analytics had to say about the reason why atheists marry (which I argue was originally a religious concept adopted by atheists who wanted to fit into society); the reason why atheist groups or any group for that matter, are not acting like Nazi Germany in this day and age is that it isn't viable. It isn't an efficient means to get along or even survive. For theists, some fear divine retribution but that doesn't mean this is their sole reason for striving for morality (whatever "goodness" one includes in their definition). They are humans just the same and are inclined to act as moral as the next guy, but religion gives them a sense of purpose. It is their touchstone that results in more action than just talk. Again, religious fanatics are more likely to lead movements that one might consider a noble or moral endeavor, than are atheists, who, in my experience, tend to live life and keep their views to themselves.

[_Roger Morrison]

I think basic evolution explains why most Atheists, and even most religionists, don't desire to rape, murder, steal, etc. We are all descended from beings with the best survival genes. Anti-social people do not create as many offspring as those who get along with others and follow the laws of their society/tribe/village. Selfishness was not a smart survival strategy in the not-too-distant past. Anti-social criminals of the past were executed, banished, and imprisoned. You don't create many offspring from that lifestyle. Our genes are made up from those who got along with their neighbors, contributed to the tribe, found a partner, and produced offspring.

That doesn't give you any good reason to follow your genetic instincts though. In addition that's a very recent evolutionary standard. Rape would increase your chances of genetic continuance. The lust for murder could lead one to become a great warrior possibly increasing your chances of mating. Theft within the tribe/family would be unlikely to win you any accolades but stealing from the tribe next door would win you praise. Depends on the society though I suppose.

"Genetic instincts" are over-laid by "nurture"... Genes have more to do with physical characteristics than with temperment, character, and spirituality, generally speaking. However, intelligence--genetic--cannot escape the influence of environment/nurture...which might indeed influence to brutalism, individually or collectively.

I think S-W-S is closer to the truth of humanity's humaneness as an Atheist than are you (Nehor) as a Theist. The major difference i see here is that SWS is talking "Evolution" while Nehor tends to "Devolution". The so-called "Light of Christ" is no repector of labels and generates empathy as we open to it.

MAN NEVER FELL!!!!! He/she ROSE through a process we are still trying to understand. So be it... THE important thing is that, within our evolving awareness there IS a greater collective conscience, and more acceptance of personal responsibility for Communal and Universal happenings. As "God" would have it... Warm regards, Roger

[_SatanWasSetUp]

However, it cannot be ignored that many of the moral leaps human society has made over the course of history has been led by those dastardly religious fanatics. Whether it be the abondoning of slavery or the strive for human rights throughout the world, it wasn't the atheist who was behind these endeavors.

Funny, I see religion and religious contention as the root cause of cruelty and misery over the years. The dark ages were dominated by religion and theocracy. The world of the Old Testament, if we are to assume it was historically accurate, was hell on earth. The enlightenment was an awakening of science and art, and American Democracy was an expirement in secular government, despite what the religious right says. I guess it depends on your point of view.