Since we (in this group at least) can't even agree upon what is
rational let alone 'profoundly rational'...and let's not get started
on 'anti-barbaric'.....and our history with even determining what
religion is....well..you get the picture. Approaching such things in
the rather normal way of group formation...based upon subjectivity
('rational') stuff can not has not and will not work ...at least not
in the long run. More objective methods and constructs must be used.
And, having said this, I do agree that rationality must be one aspect
of such a thing. Also, a group with no shocks...no rules...just
objective laws seems about right.
When it comes to cats, they just demand what the humans expect them to
demand...similar to neighbors. And, I'd ues buckshot Neil...no
vampires here.On Apr 27, 11:06 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe religion exists because we can't get to grips with genetics > and our autopoetic behaviour. Generally it's a disaster in social > modelling terms, requiring a democratic, secular state for it to be > practised freely (Spinoza). My question would be 'what are the babies > in its bathwater'? I do wonder if we could form a profoundly > rational, anti-barbaric religion. We have a new cat and just like the > other cat, demands worship and obedience to its whim. It appears to > be pregnant, suggesting not all gods are male. Watch out for the > silver bullets heading your way Slip! > > On 28 Apr, 03:46, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Was religion not a tactic to enforce law and order among the > > disorderly where large masses of people needed it? <<<Rosey > > > Well the way I see it in today's society there is law enforcement > > without any religious affiliation, society sets moral and criminal > > laws while the police, another impotent civil entity, enforces the > > laws. Religions don't enforce religious law, well not in the way some > > do with stoning and death sentences etc, If I don't adhere to church > > doctrine no one is going to knock on my door and arrest me but if I > > don't renew my drivers license I will eventually receive punishment, > > of course the police won't ask me what my religious affiliations > > are. > > Now consider that the large masses of people that you refer to, have > > in the past carried out, in the name of religion, horrible crimes > > against humanity. So in the sense that you say religion was a tactic > > to enforce law, I would ask "whose law do they enforce?". > > One only need to examine in modern history black history to see that > > it was not really the law that was enforced but the law of the land. > > Blacks conducted themselves accordingly to the local law and not to > > that of governmental law. One of the greatest things about the Obama > > Presidency is that it has lifted a great burden off the shoulders of a > > great many people who in the past had not the freedom to accept ethnic > > and cultural differentiation. Those barriers to the collective > > consciousness have been broken down. It is now acceptable to > > associate, congregate and propagate with whatever ethnicity we > > choose. Unfortunately this is not the same with the religious outlook > > because religions are not only diverse but alienated from each other > > by dogmatic declaration. > > For me religion is useless and perhaps it had some impact for a select > > few in its day but there is no evidence that religion has any impact > > today, no more than the impact of AA. > > People changing is the answer, a collective mentality across the globe > > and the breakdown of those whose personal fears interfere with their > > vision. Those with deep seated issues connected to their religious > > background and the delusions that religion creates. When you > > consider that people had at one time fallen for the concept of owning > > a pet rock, it is easy to see how easy it really is to sway people, > > the Modi Operandi for religious organizations. The good part is > > that...................... > > > People "Are" Changing! > > > On Apr 27, 8:18 pm, Rosey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Slip when you refer to the neanderthals and early homo-sapiens we > > > think of smaller groups whose advancements are remarkably noted. But > > > keep in mind that these were in fact small communities that were > > > manageable in comparison to the ever expanding early human beings. > > > Was religion not a tactic to enforce law and order among the > > > disorderly where large masses of people needed it? Did it not > > > encourage group think towards one objective goal, where everyone > > > agreed? Isn't that a sort of collective mentality? Would it be fair > > > to say that employers who impose a set of rules and conduct among > > > their employees are preaching religion? I mean the employees choose > > > to stay because they reap the reward. I think I need a chocolate > > > bar. After these messages....I'll be write back. > > > > On Apr 27, 7:25 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I can only address the question "was religion necessary altogether?". > > > > > I would venture to go back and look at our earliest ancestry, > > > > including the hominoidea. Did they sit around and wonder if there > > > > were a god, gods, the origins of humanity or the spiritual aspects of > > > > life? I think not, it wasn't necessary over and above simply living, > > > > gathering and enjoying the abundance of earth's resources. Somewhere > > > > in the evolutionary history of mankind, and probably with the > > > > discovery of thought process and reason, spiritual recognition was > > > > born, although it may have been in its most basic form. Religion at > > > > that point still was not a necessary function, it would serve no > > > > purpose. > > > > > My idea is that the advent of religion was a result of language, the > > > > ability to communicate thought to another, the ability to relay an > > > > idea to another person. As humans learned to communicate they began > > > > to question others. Groups would share ideas and try to fill the > > > > voids. When people realized there was power behind having knowledge, > > > > religion was born. However, it still was not necessary altogether as > > > > cultures existed way before then without it. > > > > > The Neanderthal were proficient in hunting, used tools and weapons > > > > which indicates the ability to think and reason, they also buried > > > > their dead. Still they hadn't any need for religion. Homo sapien, > > > > cro-magnon, a culture which obviously seemed to be advancing in the > > > > use of tools and raw material resource, items to make clothing, the > > > > ability to engrave and sculpt, decorate, make beads, use ivory, clay > > > > and create early musical instruments and most notably they created > > > > fantastic cave paintings. But they still hadn't any need for religion > > > > because it was obvious they could function without it. > > > > > So religion's only function is manipulation of society, a control > > > > factor and with the development of economic societies, a source of > > > > revenue. Religion has contributed to bias, discrimination, war and > > > > sacrificial death and now the spread of swine flu (had to throw that > > > > in orn). It is detrimental in the sense that it causes emotional > > > > stress through guilt and fear. Religion has done more to separate > > > > humanity than it has to bring humanity together. Ultimately religion > > > > offers less opportunity for spiritual growth by focusing on the > > > > external organizational aspect. All facets of life today have become > > > > influenced by religious political rule, either directly or > > > > indirectly. After thousands of years, religion has yet to show that > > > > it can produce a peaceful and loving world but more so shows how it is > > > > usually at the core of some form of atrocity or war. It doesn't matter > > > > what religion it is because they are all busy waring with each other > > > > as we speak. > > > > > I don't know about you but I don't want to die as an innocent person > > > > caught between two waring religious factions, or at the hands of some > > > > religious fanatic who thinks I'm evil. > > > > > Pachem ut Totus > > > > > On Apr 27, 1:29 pm, Rosey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Have the five major religions of the world positively or negatively > > > > > emphasized the development of early civilizations? If so, which one > > > > > do you believe was the most significant? Was religion necessary > > > > > altogether? Could the world have survived civilly without it's > > > > > conduct? I can't wait to see your answers. Sorry woke up highly > > > > > analytical today, one of those lava lamps moments. Totally > > > > > psychedelic.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
