Religion as a Failure
-
this 1 chiu ish must ask ts.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:The topic title is "Religion as a Failure"
In order to debate properly you have to define what constitutes success and what constitutes failure.
Is having a large membership success?
Or maybe you are saying that Religion is for Failures.
Really, if it is not well defined... it is just a waste of time... -
another way then is for the poster to define what he wants to argue about and so people can respond intelligenty.Originally posted by spadeTwo:this 1 chiu ish must ask ts.
For example I can say:
Religion is a failure in that it does not help its members that really need help. I say that because blah blah blah...
In this way I define what I mean by "Religion as a Failure" -
Wah lau this forum open liao never invite moi. Waste my sapport sia, spadey.Originally posted by soleachip:An Excerpt:
"In some ways I think that the moral failings of the religious boil down to a failure of
intellect and a misfiring of imagination. I’m sure that most of them are perfectly
capable of rational thought, yet they choose to fall back on the “known” moralities of
their religious traditions. This is a fall back, especially in a pluralist democracy,
because they are constantly exposed to the public dialogues about morality, but
willfully choose to ignore the knowledge of their society in favor of ready-made
moralities. It is further a failure of intellect in its simplicity: Religious morality is,
more often than not, devoid of all complexity, seeing the world in stark binary
terms. There are no difficult moral questions or conundrums, because all is obvious.
I like to think of this as a perceived “moral clarity”.
http://toddshammer.wordpress.com/2006/11/04/religion-as-a-failure-of-moral-reasoning/
Ok, craps aside. I have read the entire article, though the author seems to be rooting for gay rights at the last few paragraphs, what he has mentioned do make sense (just to clarify my stand, I'm a straight).
He made me waste time opening up many Answers.com windows just to understand his text, but in essence, what he is trying to say is that people tend to justify their actions through religion rather than through logic as it is the easier way out. Using his gay example, Christians would simply look at it and say "Oh, my bible says gaying is a sin. So this is wrong up-down-left-right," instead of looking it from other perspectives, like biologically (kinda queer to me though).
Imo, I think it's that people are getting overly-dependent on their religions. Any religion, excluding cults, is created for the good of the people, which is what I believe. I was told that Islams forbidded pork and dogs because they were common parasite carriers back then. When I look at food offerings, I would think that people in the past had tried to come up with an ingenious way to let those desperate and hungry ones on the streets having something to eat, without creating a reliance for others to give them food. So by people making food offerings to their gods, it will "filter" those who are dying of hunger and the others who can survive for the next few days and may able to find alternatives to get food in the meantime, since the former wouldn't mind offending his gods as he is about to die anyway. The undesirable consequences that comes with eating those offerings would deter them from developing reliance. Then of course, you have all those karma and confession thing coming in, so that people wouldn't dwell on their mistakes, but instead begin on working to be a better person from that point of time. So basically, our ancenstors have laid such a good "infrastructure" for us to live in already, using religions and beliefs.
But like what the 21st century Man has did to Mother Earth, Man is now screwing up all the efforts their ancenstors have done. They become overly-reliant on it. They start to think that if you have faith as small as a pea, you can command a mountain to move from A to B. So some of them would pray every day to move the money from the nearby bank to his house, hoping one day it will come true. Of course, that's an extreme, but my point is there. They have turned their religion into a superstition. They decided to stop exploring new possibilities by defining anything undefined as an effect of their religion.
"Why that ger dun like me?!?!" - "Karma."
"So it's ok if I do bad thing?" - "You exerting karma."
"Why Toto never strike?!?" - "need to kowtow 108 times at some ABC temple every full moon"
"Why she die..." - "It's pre-destined."
If people think that way, they will never progress as a society. They simply become stuck forever in a trial-and-error loop. If this was how Thomas Edison thought, he would still be testing his bulb with the first metal he started with, then complain for the 1098th time, "haiya, here aura not good, change position tmr and try again" and die before the next sunrise.
Religion, at most, should only be a guide book in people's lives, not a template for their diaries. When we are lost and on our own, we can refer to them not to determine our paths, but to guide us through ours. If copying homework in school all the time means that you are not getting the full sum out of your school fees, then living by the book from cover to back is simply wasting your life.
It maybe, just maybe, could be that our ancenstors have not expected their religions to be passed on for so long, till now. So we have issues like burning of incense papers which contributes to global warming, food rotting at altars which could possibly be enough to feed the entire Africa population, healthy dogs and tasty pork, scientists coming up with the theory of evolution which goes against the origin of Man in Christianity etc. Alas, we may have come to a road split, I suppose. From here, we may choose to firmly believe in our religion, or to be on the other side and believe in science. But what's more important would be to believe in our choice, and ultimately, believe in ourselves.
*Edited for grammar.* -
i is dunno u belly well.Originally posted by LatecomerX:Wah lau this forum open liao never invite moi. Waste my sapport sia, spadey.
i see how it goes, later then read ur reply, too wordy liao. -
I agree with the topic that any religion is bound to fail as there isn't a universal spiritual paracetemol for all ills.
In fact, because of the diversiveness of religion, the society of Man is bound to split. I would like to draw a similiarity between religion and Sauron of Lord of the Rings notoriety, both are evil and insidious.
Aragon"The day may come when the courage of Man fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship but it is not this day... In the hour of wolves and shattered shields that the Age of Man comes crashing down, but it is not this day. This day we fight! By all that you hold dear to this earth, I bid you stand, Men of the West!"
-
Hang on a second, so do you agree or disagree with evolution?Originally posted by cApitaland:Okay so you are saying that due to a change in factors leading to the evolution of the apes to man not all apes have evolved. Am I right?
I can accept your reasoning.
eh gtg slp tmw got school
-
It's open for debate whether or not religion is necessary at all. This may help:Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:The topic title is "Religion as a Failure"
In order to debate properly you have to define what constitutes success and what constitutes failure.
Is having a large membership success?
Or maybe you are saying that Religion is for Failures.
Really, if it is not well defined... it is just a waste of time...
Do we need religion as escort for moral conduct?
Are we better off embracing it as cultural practice?
Are we dangerously altering our belief system in the name of religion? For example, where do human beings come from? Created or evolved? -
And when each and every religion wants to have a say then get ready for shit to drop from the sky as hell breaks lose on earth.Originally posted by soleachip:It's open for debate whether or not religion is necessary at all. This may help:
Do we need religion as escort for moral conduct?
Are we better off embracing it as cultural practice?
Are we dangerously altering our belief system in the name of religion? For example, where do human beings come from? Created or evolved? -
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
Is there a fool proof universal idea that's safe to go along with?
And when each and every religion wants to have a say then get ready for sh[b]it to drop from the sky as hell breaks lose on earth.[/b] -
Some1 just make my horns grow...
Religion like science is a teaching...
Religion is a knowledge tat passed down by generations to cultivate one's mind and spirit
while science is a knowledge tat passed down by generations to enchance one's reasoning and logics...
All these is essential to human like human needs IQ and EQ in order to survive in the society...
Point 1
"
Some people blame global warming or current issues on science while some people blame social problems on religion... Is science and religion evil ? Science and religion are just teachings... Whether science and religion are evil or not, it depends on the users themself...
Water can float a boat ... It can also sink a boat... it is just a double edge sword... Depends on how one use it ...
"
Point 2
"
Be it if it is science or religion, all teachings alter one's belief system. Take for example : With science, we r able to make medicines tat fight the virus in us... With religion, we r able to make medicines tat fight the fear and despair in us... And furthermore, we only need a few tat are devoted to science and devoted to religion to make medicines work...
They all do their part in these world
"
Point 3
"
A teaching is learning from the past... But we cant depend on the past alone... if we need to improve, we need to learn the past and at the same time break free from the past... It is not easy to do tat... tat is y we have scholars... Whether we need to set religion as escort to moral conduct or we need to set science as escort to engineering conduct, it does not really matter... Coz, in the end, science and religion form the foundation block of moral conduct and engineering conduct... As scholars learn and discover, the rest of people will slowly learn from scholars...
"
Point 4
"
Science and religion are teachings from the past... Whether ones want to devote to it or not , it depends on one... Take for a science example : Most will not understand how a mp3 players work but most will noe how to use it to enjoy... Take for a religion example : Most will not understand how religion work but most will noe how to follow it to feel happy...
If u r really devoted to science, u will appreciate the art of how a mp3 player work... if u r really devoted to religion, u will appreciate the art of how religion work...
"
Probably, I can list a thousand and one points y religion may not be a failure... Well, I noe of an event in these world tat tries to remove all religion and culture... tat is the cultural revolution tat happens in china... I supposed no1 has made a study on tat and wat is the impact china has... tat is a living model... But to me, the objectives of the teachings from the past are meant to be good for mankind... It is the objectives tat inspire me the most... -
btw... I dont think I m smart and intelligent people...Originally posted by spadeTwo:6]This place is only for smart and intelligent people who KNOWS WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.
7] [when i think of more then i post]
But I m just itched to be
So, I apologise for the above post... tat post will be my first and final one... -
None whatsoever.... Just let them religions fight it out.Originally posted by soleachip:Is there a fool proof universal idea that's safe to go along with?
-
