Talk-Polywell.org

Interesting essay from Reason. (Libertarian Advocacy Organization.) Apparently Religion/Morality has a purpose according to a study.


http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/30/t ... ment-punis

So why does religious priming induce committed believers to punish unfair behavior? The researchers suggest two possibilities. The first is that religious primes trigger the idea that one is being watched by the gods. “In this case primed participants punish unfair behaviors because they sense that not doing so will damage their standing in the eyes of a supernatural agent,” they speculate. The second hypothesis is that religious primes “activate cultural norms pertaining to fairness and its enforcement and occasion behavior consistent with those norms.” McKay and his colleagues acknowledge that religious primes might actually invoke both mechanisms. In either case, while the gods may punish uncooperative sinners, their work is considerably enhanced if believers go out of their way to punish sinners too.

Stuff I figured out decades ago.

Of course for the american conservative, "religion" in the context of morality equals christianity and maybe judaism...and nothing else.
Personally I find it sad if people need a god, or a religion to tell them what is good and what is not and the fear of punishment in hell in order to keep these rules.

Diogenes wrote:Interesting essay from Reason. (Libertarian Advocacy Organization.) Apparently Religion/Morality has a purpose according to a study.


http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/30/t ... ment-punis

So why does religious priming induce committed believers to punish unfair behavior? The researchers suggest two possibilities. The first is that religious primes trigger the idea that one is being watched by the gods. “In this case primed participants punish unfair behaviors because they sense that not doing so will damage their standing in the eyes of a supernatural agent,” they speculate. The second hypothesis is that religious primes “activate cultural norms pertaining to fairness and its enforcement and occasion behavior consistent with those norms.” McKay and his colleagues acknowledge that religious primes might actually invoke both mechanisms. In either case, while the gods may punish uncooperative sinners, their work is considerably enhanced if believers go out of their way to punish sinners too.

Stuff I figured out decades ago.

so, Al Qaeda has a scientific justification to punish american sinners now, eh?

Skipjack wrote:Of course for the american conservative, "religion" in the context of morality equals christianity and maybe judaism...and nothing else.

In the realm of theory, it doesn't matter what god(s) you use, provided that the requirements of whatever religion are consistent with evolutionarily advantageous morals.

Skipjack wrote: Personally I find it sad if people need a god, or a religion to tell them what is good and what is not and the fear of punishment in hell in order to keep these rules.

You can bemoan the fact that people tend to behave better towards each other if they fear retribution, but that is a characteristic of human nature.
You might as well complain that humans act "humanish."

AcesHigh wrote:

Diogenes wrote:Interesting essay from Reason. (Libertarian Advocacy Organization.) Apparently Religion/Morality has a purpose according to a study.


http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/30/t ... ment-punis

So why does religious priming induce committed believers to punish unfair behavior? The researchers suggest two possibilities. The first is that religious primes trigger the idea that one is being watched by the gods. “In this case primed participants punish unfair behaviors because they sense that not doing so will damage their standing in the eyes of a supernatural agent,” they speculate. The second hypothesis is that religious primes “activate cultural norms pertaining to fairness and its enforcement and occasion behavior consistent with those norms.” McKay and his colleagues acknowledge that religious primes might actually invoke both mechanisms. In either case, while the gods may punish uncooperative sinners, their work is considerably enhanced if believers go out of their way to punish sinners too.

Stuff I figured out decades ago.

so, Al Qaeda has a scientific justification to punish american sinners now, eh?

If your argument is that Muslim radicals feel righteous in punishing people who don't live up to their version of piety, then you are proffering the obvious. (They don't need science to feel this way.)


Islam is a meme. A meme particularly successful at spreading itself, but not so much at improving the lives of it's adherents.

Judaism is also a meme. Judaism is not so successful at spreading itself, but it is highly successful at improving the lives of it's adherents.

Christianity is a meme. Christianity is good at spreading itself AND improving the lives of it's adherents.

Christianity has a problem though. It is SO successful that it creates an environment prosperous enough to germinate the seeds of its own destruction. (The memes of Atheism and Hedonism.)

here is your Libertarian pushed morality

Bradlee Dean: Keith Ellison is advancing Sharia law through ‘homosexual agenda’

http://minnesotaindependent.com/74635/b ... ual-agenda


really, from where do teabaggers pull out so much nonsense?

AcesHigh wrote:here is your Libertarian pushed morality

Bradlee Dean: Keith Ellison is advancing Sharia law through ‘homosexual agenda’

http://minnesotaindependent.com/74635/b ... ual-agenda


really, from where do teabaggers pull out so much nonsense?

Twas brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe; All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe.

Makes as much sense as the sh*t you write.

Ironically, I just watched the new Alice this evening with the kids. Beware the Jabberwock my son.

Diogenes wrote: Twas brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe; All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe.

Makes as much sense as the sh*t you write.

this coming from the guy most full of shit in this entire forum? Thanks for being a joke. You provide me a few smiles each day after I see the funny bullshit you write everyday in this forum.

Skipjack wrote:Of course for the american conservative, "religion" in the context of morality equals christianity and maybe judaism...and nothing else.
Personally I find it sad if people need a god, or a religion to tell them what is good and what is not and the fear of punishment in hell in order to keep these rules.

Have you witnessed what happens when people decide what is moral?

1920's to 1990's Soviet Russia
1930's to 1940's Germany
Modern day North Korea
The French Revolution
The Cuban Revolution under Che Guevara
etc...
Not to mention slavery in the United States (and don't say "slavery was in the Bible", it was never condoned in the Bible, anything called "slavery" and condoned in the Bible was indentured servitude, though the Israelites were in fact real slaves in Egypt, that is, they entered into that condition and were held there against their will).

Have you witnessed what happens when people decide what is moral?

The bible was also written by people.

Skipjack wrote:

Have you witnessed what happens when people decide what is moral?

The bible was also written by people.

Not that I want to turn this into a debate on this, but the Bible is divinely inspired, with plenty of evidence to back that up (like multiple authors separated by tens of generations, vast geographical distances, and being unaware of each other, all being written as if a single mind assembled the principles, despite multiple minds coming up with the words).

But I digress. Compare two societies, one that lives by strict Biblical principles (if such a nation ever did exist, instead, just take the closest we can find), and the other that lives by the teachings of secular humanism, things like eugenics, the perfecting of the human being, etc.

mdeminico wrote:Not that I want to turn this into a debate on this

indeed so....

mdeminico wrote:but the Bible is divinely inspired, with plenty of evidence to back that up (like multiple authors separated by tens of generations, vast geographical distances, and being unaware of each other, all being written as if a single mind assembled the principles

I can't think of a book that more poorly exemplifies 'internal consistency' than the bible.

...and that's even after various people over time have taken the opportunity to dump various chapters from it that did not go with the main theme [whatever that is!].

But there again, maybe you have a point because we can see that all religious works teach a clear message of consistency: This can be seen by counting how few denominations there are in major religions, and how harmonious they are between them. Most of the major religions only have one unified denomination and they never argue over the meaning of their religious texts.......

What a load of old codswallop.....

You seem to be swayed by a divine inspiration to read something more than is actually written into the bible. That's your problem to live with. If the underlying text was, indeed, laid down by a super-being then it would have been in specific and incontrovertible literary style that no-one would be able to re-interpret and re-re-interpret what it is all meant to mean - it'd mean the same thing to everyone. It doesn't, and therefore it makes no sense to argue it is underwritten by a super-being.

Not turning this thread into this debate, PM me if you want to talk about it Chris or Ship (or anyone else).

Regardless, like I said, look at a society that follows Christian principles, and compare it to a secular humanist society that follows that philosophy's beliefs (I named a few already in my first post in this thread).

By your standards, name me a society that follows christian principles, please. I dont know one. Maybe the Vatican (but that is catholizism then, which some christians argue is not really christian either).
I am sure you are referring to the US, but really how much is this country following "christian principles"? How much has it ever followed "christian principles".
Exactly what christian principles are you referring to anyway?
Some people may call many of the christian principles (share your wealth with the community, love your neighbour, treat everybody equal, etc) quite socialist, at least to some extent.
So really, what does your christian society look like? I have not seen one, really.