Themis wrote:And you cannot provide a source for this either. You keep putting the word religion in when it should be just humans. What things do you suggest was developed that helps agnostics and and atheists be happier. Be specific.
You really like your sources, don't you. I really don't like to argue sources. If you have something that disputes my ideas and have a source, I will read it. But I don't usually follow links either. If you don't care enough to explain it, or don't understand it yourself, I'm not impressed that you can link your ideas to someone's website.
For example: I don't really now that humans have been humans for 4 million year. I would not bet my life on the research, but in general, I can accept it. I'm not going to go out and find all of the research I've read to come my opinions and publish it here. If you think I'm wrong that happy cities be religious, why should I go out and find research that you can criticize? Like maybe the article was written by AAA travel, or maybe the Wall Street Journal. How is my providing sources going to make me more believable?
My opinion is that humans have been what I consider human for about 200,000 year, but please don't ask for me for sources. I'm just not that scholarly.
What was developed for agnostics and atheists? Until the invention of godless government, they were probably very rare.
For me personally, I am a believer, agnostic, and atheist. I find all three approaches to be very helpful
Gnostic/Believer = Art of Knowing
Agnostic = Art of Not Knowing
Atheist = Art of Knowing Nothing
I wouldn't define myself as any one of these. I believe a lot of things very strongly, but I admit I don't know anything, except that I know that the secrets are hidden in the Nothing.
Religion allowed people to communicate about things they couldn't see. Use honor for example: It's invisible but people could talk about it, measure it, expect it, judge it, lose it, gain it, etc. But it only worked if people worked and talked together. If you meet someone from another tribe, or a stranger, if they didn't have the same beliefs you did, you would not assume they had the same honor as you did. The religion was a like a virtual world to develop invisible things.
You say "just people" but what mechanism did human have to develop invisible ideas that wasn't religious? We have written laws now that we can hold people accountable too, but that is more recent. Where did honor come from if not some invisible standard enforced by common belief. How were the ideas spread? Look at all the gods through history. Even much later, say the Greeks and their philosophy that was mildly religious free, they still used Gods in their day to day lives. Most philosophers, even if they tried to make their philosophy stand without religion, they personally used religion to spread and enforce their ideas. For example, the foundation of communism, (though it tries to be religion free) it promises an utopia, a heaven without crime where people trust each other. But it usually fails. My thought is because humans need some sort of higher authority than just to their mortal existence. My thought is the our identity isn't mortal, therefore mortal law isn't enough to keep us in line.
