English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The problem with religion is that we give it a weird kind of respect, which uniquely protects it from normal criticism.

We use normal criticism against folk tales, alien sightings, magic, sexism, racism, drug use, cannibalism, etc.

If we could rid ourselves of this Respect (which rational people inherited from early scientists. This respect was first acquired by fear of death and torture, due to the inquisitive nature of organised religions), how would we analyse religious beliefs?

Religion passes no rational, logical, nor scientific methods of argumentation.

Would it be defendable if only a handful of people believed in religion?

2007-11-24 12:52:30 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

>>wefmeister
I will not select you as best answer, but I gave you a "thumbs up" for making a Statement.

2007-11-24 13:07:11 · update #1

>>realchurchhistorian
It is really a number of little things that add up. Per exemple: the debates between pro-life and pro-choice is mostly religious. Pro-choice usually uses social, philosophical and scientific evidence to support it. While pro-life usually refers to the "sacred nature of human life", a "woman's purpose" and the Bible's view on sexuality.
Also, if you look closely at your Heinz's ketchup bottle, and many other prepared foods, you'll see a symbol that warns jewish people that the product is kosher. We allow religion to interfere with our alimentation.
Religion is present 24/7 in our everyday lives... weither we like it or not.

2007-11-24 13:17:38 · update #2

>>Monkey Chunks
Religion (from wiki):A religion is a social institution that includes a set of common beliefs and practices generally held by a group of people, often codified as prayer, ritual, and religious law. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and mystic experience. The term "religion" refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction.

2007-11-24 13:19:53 · update #3

18 answers

It seems to me that it is subjected to extraordinary criticism.
I think your penultimate statement is completely without merit.

I don't think you have any interest in the truth, but only what makes you comfortable.

2007-11-24 12:57:52 · answer #1 · answered by wefmeister 7 · 4 2

You have to get some things straight before you ask such serious questions.

1. What religion are you talking about? By religion do you mean some organized group like Catholic church? Or do you mean believing certain things?

2. The difference between religion and things you mention is that religions make claims on reality. Religions usually are sets of beliefs its not an action like drug use, racism, cannibalism.

3. In modern day people do not follow a certain religion because of fear of torture or government. Maybe in Middle eastern countries, yes, not in USA. I am sure you see that in USA all sorts of religion is discouraged by popular culture, school, media.

4. Why would you assume that religion is irrational, and that people who question religion are necessarily rational? I am sure to many religious people reasons for believing things they believe are rational.

2007-11-24 21:06:04 · answer #2 · answered by Monkey Chunks 3 · 0 1

I hope you will lead the movement to subject religion to "normal criticism" because that's exactly what we need. There are way too many people who think they are Christian because they live in a society that is governed by roughly Christian rules. They think that they were born Christian the way they were born into whatever nationality they are. Removing the phony respect that is out there would help separate the wheat from the chaff. There is now very little difference between many of the "Christians" and non-believers in this world.

2007-11-24 21:00:13 · answer #3 · answered by William D 5 · 4 0

Authentic religion holds up quite well in response to any type of criticism, and even to persecution.

The Catholic Church has been in existence for some 2000 years now. It was intensely persecuted for its' first 400 years, it has been the subject if very harsh criticism for at least the past 400 to 500 years, and in spite of some recent and notable corruption within it, Catholicism remains stronger than ever.

And since the original number of Catholics once numbered a few more than 12, but less than 500, and it was at that time, the subject of intense persecution, numbers really don't matter at all.

With God, all things are possible.

2007-11-25 03:58:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

You have captured the spirit of Sam Harris’ book “The End of Faith” quite well. If you haven’t read it, I highly recommend it. He basically supports your thesis, and goes to great lengths to prove that our unwillingness to call religion’s bluff is ultimately to our detriment.

I am in absolute agreement with you that we accord religion a sacrosanct status that makes it virtually immune to the sort of scrutiny and rational analysis that any other truth claim is subject to. In areas of science, jurisprudence, history, and culture we never grant any proposition shelter from examination, and generally if any proponent of any theory, from any of these disciplines, asks to not be investigated, or seeks to evade the processes of inquiry, generally we deem him to be knowingly promoting a falsehood.

Would any Christian trust a doctor who says that such and such surgical method that he is about to administer to them is unproven, but he has faith in it and he should not be questioned? Would any Christian agree to drive in a car that is certified, not through rigorous testing from independent labs, but merely because the engineer who designed the car has faith it will work? I think most of these Christian will answer no to both questions.

The truth is that even Christians, no matter how far they lean toward fundamentalism, apply the principles of reason, logic, and evidence to all propositions that matter in their life, and they will only trust those people, in every thing except religion, who also apply these standards of rationality. Yet, when it comes to their faith, they abhor investigation. To me this indicates that they aren’t really sincere believers, for if they truly believed, they would never dissuade others from criticizing their faith.

Sam Harris in his book “The End of Faith” makes a point that is worth noting and heeding. He essentially states that the protection we accord religious maxims, a protection that is promoted by many moderates, actually works to shelter the ideologies of fundamentalists. In an age where WMDs are easily accessible, this reticence to call a spade a spade will only embolden fundamentalists, which in turn can only have dire consequences for the rest of humanity. There is more at stake here than academic or intellectual integrity. There are real practical consequences we are dealing with. Whether we decide to protect religion from examination, or subject it to it, will greatly determine the fate of humanity.

2007-11-25 21:46:20 · answer #5 · answered by Lawrence Louis 7 · 0 0

I have been on Yahoo for a few months now, attended a University, traveled, and worked with a lot of different people.

I am having a hard time relating to the idea of respect you are talking about. Either a person believes in God or not. Those who do not have never shown any type of respect like you are talking about.

Where are you from?

2007-11-24 21:01:37 · answer #6 · answered by realchurchhistorian 4 · 1 2

That is a very good point. Religion gets a "respect" it really does not deserve. And, of course, in the past the church was very powerful. One had to show respect to that power, the same as had to be shown to kings and other dictators. It would never stand up to any kind of test, on any level.

2007-11-24 20:57:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

religion is only a ritual. A practice and is subject to normal criticism. Different beliefs exercise different religion.

2007-11-24 21:04:02 · answer #8 · answered by use 2 b lost 3 · 0 0

Religion is based upon fabrications and enforced by fear, guilt and just plain wanting to do what's right. The religious folks will not live and let live, but somehow feel they must force their beliefs and morals upon you..

2007-11-24 20:59:20 · answer #9 · answered by notadeadbeat 5 · 1 0

I keep saying all the time... CNN was not on around the time of Jesus... the Flood... Moses and so on...Let me assure you that we would have a diffeent world today!

There is not a trace of evidence that King David ever existed outside the Bible... Or anybody up to the time of Jesus for that matter! Even Jesus' existance is questinable!

2007-11-24 21:03:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

You are right - religion receives far more than normal criticism.
The word is "defensible"...
- it is a matter of faith, and there are two billion Christians worldwide.

2007-11-24 21:01:52 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers