The Reality Of Progressivism

[Diogenes]

God of Abraham, Christ and Mohammad.

Has any one checked to see if they are the same? I know that is the claim. Where is the proof?

You want PROOF regarding religion? So does everybody else!

And then there is the question of Passover. The Bible commands believers to celebrate it. I know a few Christians do. So how can the Jewish and Christian God be the same if so few follow the Jewish commands? Same for the Islamics. And why do so few Christians study Jewish common law?

I think they both copied the bits they liked, and ignored the rest. Sounds like human beings are involved.

[kcdodd]

I don't think religious morality is required. Children can be taught methods of ethical/moral reasoning just as easily as sending them to bible school. Both of my parents were pastors, but they never tried to instill a fear of god, I never adopted it for myself, and yet I still grew up ethically minded.

MSimon, I read your link on gay marriage but did not really see any discussion there.

[MSimon]

I like that.

Religion - Santa Claus for adults.

And I say that as a believer. Religion must be questioned. At every turn. Reason over faith. Which does not negate faith. It just limits it.

[MSimon]

MSimon, I read your link on gay marriage but did not really see any discussion there.

It was but one among many posts on the subject by my co-blogger. I thought you might like to see where he is coming from.

If you want more search.

[Diogenes]

I don't think religious morality is required. Children can be taught methods of ethical/moral reasoning just as easily as sending them to bible school. Both of my parents were pastors, but they never tried to instill a fear of god, I never adopted it for myself, and yet I still grew up ethically minded.

MSimon, I read your link on gay marriage but did not really see any discussion there.

This is another aspect that I have discussed often. People have the notion that because they have morals and/or ethics, and that they don't have religion themselves, that proves that religion isn't necessary.

The overlooked elephant in the room is that they make these proclamations while surrounded by an ocean of people suffused with Judeo-Christian doctrine. (The effect of the herd mentality) Also overlooked is the notion that not all people react the same way to their mental environment. There are those who are likely to do evil if not cowed by the threat of divine retribution, and who therefore mitigate their behavior.


The only way to establish whether a system not based on religion can actually produce people who are moral by Judeo-Christian standards, is to find one completely devoid of religion for at least a generation.

Some of the former (heh) communist countries might work to obtain insight. Unfortunately, (to the discussion) religion is sort of making a come back in those places, so perhaps its influence never completely waned. I've read several scientists remarking that humans seem to be genetically predisposed to religion. I suspect very strongly that this is true.

It wouldn't be the first time that people tried to separate humanity from it's genetic predispositions. The Liberal\Progressive\Socialist\Communistic types have long been trying to argue people out of being greedy, but it just never seems to work.

Might as well try to convince the leopard that he ought not have spots.

[Diogenes]

I like that.

Religion - Santa Claus for adults.

And I say that as a believer. Religion must be questioned. At every turn. Reason over faith. Which does not negate faith. It just limits it.

I am thinking that if Religion is a prop that serves a beneficial purpose to society, we should leave it alone.

I have learned lots of things that I wished I hadn't, and I make a point not to discuss them because it is better for people to be happy and ignorant than wise and sad.

Believing that there is a kind and benevolent God who loves you and wants you to be happy is good for people. The notion that the universe is vast, cold, dark and extremely hostile and that people's lives are insignificant in the scope of it may be true, but it is not very useful for promoting optimism. I know old people that are at the end of their lives, and the only thing they have to look forward to is Sugar Candy Mountain.

Spreading misery is the opposite of helpful. So I always say:
"Yes, Virginia, there is a Sugar Candy Mountain. "

Like I said. A Pro-Theistic Agnostic.

[kcdodd]

You are assuming that the "ocean of people suffused with Judeo-Christian doctrine" are moral themselves. Being religious does not make one moral, or ethical. Those who promote ethical behavior beget ethical behavior. Those who promote the opposite beget the opposite. Whether they are religious or not. Those who follow blindly have only a 50/50 chance of getting it right.

[Helius]

Spreading misery is the opposite of helpful. So I always say:
"Yes, Virginia, there is a Sugar Candy Mountain. "

FWIW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CW0hGhI ... re=related I always got a kick out of that one.

[Betruger]

The cold hard truth of an indifferent universe is the basis for realistic optimism. The "warmth" of religion is just a comfortable prison, in that respect.

[Diogenes]

You are assuming that the "ocean of people suffused with Judeo-Christian doctrine" are moral themselves. Being religious does not make one moral, or ethical.

To me, it is axiomatic that a sufficient quantity of people all stating that something is wrong, will have MORE social impact than people saying nothing at all, or in fact promoting the behavior.

Those who promote ethical behavior beget ethical behavior. Those who promote the opposite beget the opposite. Whether they are religious or not. Those who follow blindly have only a 50/50 chance of getting it right.

Agreed, however the central pivot point in this discussion is how to explain Why?

It is likewise axiomatic that some bad behavior produces desirous effects for an organism. Stealing another organisms food, is good for the stealer, not the stealee. Having sex (rape or adultery) with females likewise produces offspring thereby spreading an organisms genes. Another plus for bad behavior. Killing others eliminates competition. Lying gets one out of trouble.

There are a lot of benefits to an individual to not play by the rules. How do you convince another person to not behave badly, even when people aren't watching them? Reasoning only works at a certain level of consciousness, and attempting to reason someone into being good is like attempting to reason them to love. You can threaten them with punishment, but everyone knows the punishers can't be everywhere, and the odds are good that people will usually be able to get away with bad behavior.

The brilliance of religion is that it appoints their own mind as a watchdog against them. It relies on human instincts of fear of punishment, and it claims a omniscient being who is keeping score, and no one can prove there isn't!

If you balance human instinct against another human instinct, you can attain detente. If you try to balance human instinct against reason, the instinct will eventually win.

As others have pointed out before me, The Muslims in Europe are not impressed by European notions of enlightenment and tolerance. The only force which can oppose a religion is another religion. They will happily listen to your reasoned arguments until they have your head off of your neck.

[Diogenes]

Spreading misery is the opposite of helpful. So I always say:
"Yes, Virginia, there is a Sugar Candy Mountain. "

FWIW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CW0hGhI ... re=related I always got a kick out of that one.

Yeah, that's a wonderful song, but my reference was from the book by George Orwell, "Animal Farm." Sugar Candy Mountain was the "retirement" home for animals that had worked on the farm.

Awesome book.

[Diogenes]

The cold hard truth of an indifferent universe is the basis for realistic optimism. The "warmth" of religion is just a comfortable prison, in that respect.

It might be the key to a prison. I think people would rather be happy than live in despair. I also think they accomplish more.

Religion is like an artificial guide star in Astronomy. It works. Who cares if it's not the real thing?

[Betruger]

"Who cares if it's not the real thing?"

I find that revolting, but it's probably just me. I also don't buy that you need a religious pacifier to be happy. Everyone's got the means to overcome most of the difficulty in their lives. There's no excuse needed to be happy, or at least to have a clear conscience if you're giving your life everything you've got.

[kcdodd]

If your goal is to simply to control a population, then religion has historically been a very effective tool at doing that. However, control and ethics are independent. The ethical content of such a religion is at the behest of whomever is leading the religion. They could say "give me your money for it is gods will" or "kill thy enemy for it is gods will" as easily as "treat each other with kindness for it is gods will". There is no inherent ethical content in religion, at least from the argument you are making.

How you determine ethical behavior is independent from your delivery method. One has to enter into a circular line of reasoning to escape this truth. For example, "the divine prophet of Suchandsuchanity was given the will of god". Gods message would include the statement that god exists and that the message in divine, which proves the existence of god, which allows the prophet to promote the message as being from god and not from their own reasoning.

Is all of that necessary? Well, I certainty don't believe it. Some people do have difficulty with reasoning skills, I will grant you that, but most are capable, especially if it is started at an early age, as religious doctrine typically is.

[Jccarlton]

I'm going to hijack the thead back because I thought this piece Msimon posted in his blog was pertinent.
More on the reality of what happens in a bureaucratic state:

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/

The fact is that people will make do and avoid the bureaucracy when the bureaucracy outlive it's usefulness. I've seen it happen too often. When gov't gets too onerous but can't really enforce it's dictates people will just ignore it.