My question is based on the premise that people choose a worldview using at least a tiny degree of reasoning. Given that, how does that innate sense get overridden once the worldview is chosen. What is that trumps the reasoning and good sense and puts the worldview in charge?Thanks, a very interesting perspective. I agree with Lausten, IMO, the problem lies in the rejection by religions of secular scientific knowledge of the real world and not analyzing the long term results of adopting an exclusive worldview, such as an exclusive religion, which forbids the application of knowledge (which is constantly increasing) of how the universe actually works. My question would be: why do people cling to beliefs which are demonstrably false or misleading? A few examples: a) the comparative world view values where mysticism trumps knowledge. b) the motivated creation of the universe by an intelligent, emotionally driven supernatural entity. c) the belief in intelligent design, rather than the evolutionary process of the universe in accordance with identified natural laws. d) what are heaven and hell, and where they may be found. e) as George Carlin once explained: religious moral values are negotiable. example: "thou shalt not kill", except when god commands it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r-e2NDSTuE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CE8ooMBIyC8 I could go on, but this is already a platefull, so i'll leave it at this (for now).
Write4you wrote
My question would be: why do people cling to beliefs which are demonstrably false or misleading?
There is one simple answer-- they are determined to by their genes and environment and they are incapable of overcoming those determining factors.
Rejecting the idea of free will answers so many questions and makes life so much easier than wracking your brain to come up with any other reason for human actions. There is none. It is an exercise in futility.
Lois
Please reply stating “The single most important question you would like to have answered?"How do we get religious leaders to update their holy texts in ways that allow their followers to live peacefully with followers of other religions or no religion? In other words, how can the Bible and the Koran be updated to have messages more like the Sutras and Vedas? I don't agree with any of these holy books but I think the world would be better off if the Abrahamic religions were more like the eastern religions.
Please reply stating “The single most important question you would like to have answered?"How do we get religious leaders to update their holy texts in ways that allow their followers to live peacefully with followers of other religions or no religion? In other words, how can the Bible and the Koran be updated to have messages more like the Sutras and Vedas? I don't agree with any of these holy books but I think the world would be better off if the Abrahamic religions were more like the eastern religions. I agree that Deism (an implaccable force) is much more benign and closer to the true nature of the universe than Theism. However this still does not prove that any is religion preferable as a moral guide than ethical atheism.
That’s an easy one, Scott; we return to polytheism. Oh, you asked “how,” not “what.” Making higher education free to anyone who wants to attend college and can make the grades would be a good start.
That's an easy one, Scott; we return to polytheism. Oh, you asked "how," not "what." Making higher education free to anyone who wants to attend college and can make the grades would be a good start.How would polytheism be better than monotheism? I think the larger problem with the Abrahamic religions are all the intolerant dogmas not the fact that they refer to a single god. Hinduism is monotheistic and you don't hear about too many problems with "radical Hinduism". :)
Monotheism is where the intolerance originated.
But how would changing, say Islam, from monotheism to polytheism reduce their intolerance of other religions? If Muslim leaders updated the Koran to say that Allah is just the top god, like Zeus or Odin, and now there are 50 other Islamic gods that take care of specific things like agriculture and internet connectivity, how does that reduce intolerance? The dogmas about homosexuality and women’s virginity and images of Mohammad are all still there. Do you think it would change anything?
Polytheism inherently tolerates multiple gods.
Ancient Romans were polytheists and were intolerant of Jews, Christians, and druids. They were even intolerant of a sect within their own religion that focused on Bacchus, god of wine.
Good point. Maybe we should stick with free higher education and hope for the best.
The problem is not belief in many gods, one god or a god that has disappeared. It’s belief in the concept of any god or in the supernatural. The person who believes in one god is no more sensible than the one who believes in many or the disappearing act. What do numbers have to do with it? An unsupported and irrational belief is an unsupported and irrational belief. There is no number or type of god(s) that can avoid that position.
Lois
If everyone in the world would lose their religious belief tomorrow then I think the world would be a better place. However, I think the odds of that happening are near zero, even over a much longer timescale than a single day. Like Darron said, education is the key to reducing religiosity but even that doesn’t take it to zero. There is a video of Neil DeGrasse Tyson talking about people with PhD’s in science who still believe in a personal god that hears and answers prayers. He says something like, “…until that number is zero, how can we expect the general public to be less religious…”. Something to that effect, at least.
Comprehensive reform within Islam and Christianity is needed to reduce the intolerance. The Catholics are moving in the right direction with homosexuals and contraception, so we know that it is possible to do. It will likely take many, many years to become part of general Catholic population’s opinion, but it’s likely to happen. Jews were vilified by the Catholic church until the 1930’s (somewhere in there, at least) and today anti-semetism is much, much lower than it was even 50 years ago.
If everyone in the world would lose their religious belief tomorrow then I think the world would be a better place. However, I think the odds of that happening are near zero, even over a much longer timescale than a single day. Like Darron said, education is the key to reducing religiosity but even that doesn't take it to zero. There is a video of Neil DeGrasse Tyson talking about people with PhD's in science who still believe in a personal god that hears and answers prayers. He says something like, "...until that number is zero, how can we expect the general public to be less religious...". Something to that effect, at least. Comprehensive reform within Islam and Christianity is needed to reduce the intolerance. The Catholics are moving in the right direction with homosexuals and contraception, so we know that it is possible to do. It will likely take many, many years to become part of general Catholic population's opinion, but it's likely to happen. Jews were vilified by the Catholic church until the 1930's (somewhere in there, at least) and today anti-semetism is much, much lower than it was even 50 years ago.I think that reform is needed, but reform always brings backlashes. IS is a blacklash against softer, gentler approaches to interpretation of the Quran. Fundamentalists always arise in the wake of any religious reform. And, reform of religion almost never involves revision of the sacred text. The parts that inspire fundamentalists are the parts reformers try to downplay and reinterpret in a more progressive light. But, the fundamentalist will always seek to return to the orriginal interpretation, viewing any deviation as blasphemy. The reformers and the fundamentalists both claim to be the true religion. That is why progressive Moslems can not restrain extremists. They don't view the extremists as Moslems, and vice versa. The sacred texts are the root of the problem.
If everyone in the world would lose their religious belief tomorrow then I think the world would be a better place. However, I think the odds of that happening are near zero, even over a much longer timescale than a single day. Like Darron said, education is the key to reducing religiosity but even that doesn't take it to zero. There is a video of Neil DeGrasse Tyson talking about people with PhD's in science who still believe in a personal god that hears and answers prayers. He says something like, "...until that number is zero, how can we expect the general public to be less religious...". Something to that effect, at least. Comprehensive reform within Islam and Christianity is needed to reduce the intolerance. The Catholics are moving in the right direction with homosexuals and contraception, so we know that it is possible to do. It will likely take many, many years to become part of general Catholic population's opinion, but it's likely to happen. Jews were vilified by the Catholic church until the 1930's (somewhere in there, at least) and today anti-semetism is much, much lower than it was even 50 years ago.I think that reform is needed, but reform always brings backlashes. IS is a blacklash against softer, gentler approaches to interpretation of the Quran. Fundamentalists always arise in the wake of any religious reform. And, reform of religion almost never involves revision of the sacred text. The parts that inspire fundamentalists are the parts reformers try to downplay and reinterpret in a more progressive light. But, the fundamentalist will always seek to return to the orriginal interpretation, viewing any deviation as blasphemy. The reformers and the fundamentalists both claim to be the true religion. That is why progressive Moslems can not restrain extremists. They don't view the extremists as Moslems, and vice versa. The sacred texts are the root of the problem. Belief that any text can be sacred is the problem, along with belief in the supernatural and eternal rewards and damnation. . Without that all the inhabitants of the world could live in peace and concentrate on making the world a better place for everyone. We'd still have a problem with the distribution of resources and greed, but it would be a great advance if we could at least dispense with belief in sacred texts and the supernatural and the idea that there is a god or gods directing us and creating morality. Lois
Monotheism is where the intolerance originated.I totally agree. The exclusive nature of religions, breeds contempt for anyone who practices a different religion or has a different interpretation or viewpoint. The beauty of Science is that it is self-correcting. A scientific theory must be falsifiable and is inherently open ended to allow for correction. No such test can be applied to theism. It is inherently a closed Book which declares it is Ultimate Undisputable Truth.
“The single most important question you would like to have answered?" - Why ?
If we understand the Why’s of Life then the truth will be discovered…
Without asking Why . I feel we would remain in the dark…
“The single most important question you would like to have answered?" - Why ? If we understand the Why's of Life then the truth will be discovered... Without asking Why . I feel we would remain in the dark..Why? IMO, the answer is "because it could", or in a more formal way, the potential (implication) for expression in physical reality existed prior to becoming explicated in reality. It is the How which eludes us, because our mathematical models break down at the Planck Epoch, the first measurable instant in the life of this universe. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Astro/unify.html
My career has been primarily in government and private-sector, production and operations activities with academic preparation in operations research, economics, and finance. I’ve browsed the CFI forum for some time and finally feel comfortable in starting the following discussion. Please reply stating “The single most important question you would like to have answered?"Here is my single most important question that I would like to have answered: What is humankind's single most important question that is yet to be answered correctly?
What is humankind's single most important question that is yet to be answered correctly?How do we get along with each other, and diversity, (and physical realities) in a rational constructive manner? How do we balance the individual's need for independence and freedom - with the reality of living on a way overpopulated increasingly depleted planet?