The Atheism Thread - Part 5

[Doctor Evo]

Praying probably naturally evolved in homo sapiens for some purpose.

Praying is a behavior that is a subset, or consequence, of religion. I think it would be more valid to say that religion "naturally evolved," as opposed to prayer itself, but even the former claim seems dubious. Human ethology is very, very tricky. You have to be careful to make clear distinctions between fundamental psychological (or ethological) traits and the resulting behaviors.

In other words, behaviors like prayer are more likely to be distant evolutionary by-products than they are to be direct evolutionary consequences.

 

[jmc]

Praying probably naturally evolved in homo sapiens for some purpose. Praying is therapeutic for many people. Heck it may begun as something entirely different and evolved into what we now know of as praying.

Or there is the idea that praying is an ego stroke for some narcissistic deity. Maybe praying accomplishes nothing, but the deity likes to watch us beg and pray.

Meditation has always seemed to me to be the better activity. And I'd be willing to bet that praying and meditating are linked in their origins.

Fantasy is what evolved in humans not prayer, it's there as a defensive mechanism to keep us on the look out for trouble.

 

[regwec]

Re the origins of prayer- think about how you define prayer. If it includes sacrifices, shrine-building, and other attempts to commune with the natural elements and the once unknown forces that controlled them, then I think prayer probably did develop as a natural human effort to lessen the dangers and hardships of life on the margins. Of course early humans would do anything to try to ensure a baby was born healthy or a harvest didn't fail.

In this respect, I think "religion" must have followed prayer, in the chicken-and-egg scenario. "Religion" could just be defined as the attempt to impose regulations and power structures on these small acts of would-be magic making. This allows a monopoly to be structured on people's hopes and fears: if you make sacrifice to the rain god all by yourself, it can go terribly wrong. Better pay a priest to do it.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Re the origins of prayer- think about how you define prayer. If it includes sacrifices, shrine-building, and other attempts to commune with the natural elements and the once unknown forces that controlled them, then I think prayer probably did develop as a natural human effort to lessen the dangers and hardships of life on the margins. Of course early humans would do anything to try to ensure a baby was born healthy or a harvest didn't fail.

In this respect, I think "religion" must have followed prayer, in the chicken-and-egg scenario. "Religion" could just be defined as the attempt to impose regulations and power structures on these small acts of would-be magic making. This allows a monopoly to be structured on people's hopes and fears: if you make sacrifice to the rain god all by yourself, it can go terribly wrong. Better pay a priest to do it.

I take issue with this definition - I think it's too narrow. But I suppose that now we're arguing semantics.

 

[Marvolo]

Praying is a behavior that is a subset, or consequence, of religion. I think it would be more valid to say that religion "naturally evolved," as opposed to prayer itself, but even the former claim seems dubious. Human ethology is very, very tricky. You have to be careful to make clear distinctions between fundamental psychological (or ethological) traits and the resulting behaviors.

In other words, behaviors like prayer are more likely to be distant evolutionary by-products than they are to be direct evolutionary consequences.

Richard Dawkins the self appointed bane of religion has posited some theories on prayer and religion and which came first and what purpose they may or may not serve psychologically. Its interesting stuff if you can get past his attitude.

I tend to think things evolve to a higher complexity especially social interactions. Religion is too complex to be the starting point. Prayer or some proto prayer activity must have predated religion otherwise religion wouldn't have much of a base if it isn't to commune with the "higher powers".

 

[NickNitro]

If religion spiritually helps you be a better person, helps you get through your day, helps you cope with the harsh realities of life, then pray away. For people its as much as way of being Zen as it is talking to their God.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Richard Dawkins the self appointed bane of religion has posited some theories on prayer and religion and which came first and what purpose they may or may not serve psychologically. Its interesting stuff if you can get past his attitude.

The question of which came first concerns me less than the issue of whether they constitute direct evolutionary consequences. The fact that they serve a psychological purpose doesn't necessarily put them in that category.

Of course, I don't know the answer, and it's an interesting question. We could probably place these phenomena in the broader category of coping mechanisms, which may hold greater significance in evolutionary terms.

I tend to think things evolve to a higher complexity...

Careful here...this isn't always the case!

...especially social interactions. Religion is too complex to be the starting point. Prayer or some proto prayer activity must have predated religion otherwise religion wouldn't have much of a base if it isn't to commune with the "higher powers".

Well, again, the "which came first?" question isn't as interesting to me. This may very well be true. But we have to carefully define "prayer" and "religion" before we can arrive at any meaningful conclusions.

 

[Marvolo]

The question of which came first concerns me less than the issue of whether they constitute direct evolutionary consequences. The fact that they serve a psychological purpose doesn't necessarily put them in that category.

Of course, I don't know the answer, and it's an interesting question. We could probably place these phenomena in the broader category of coping mechanisms, which may hold greater significance in evolutionary terms.

Careful here...this isn't always the case!

Well, again, the "which came first?" question isn't as interesting to me. This may very well be true. But we have to carefully define "prayer" and "religion" before we can arrive at any meaningful conclusions.

"Coping mechanism" that's what I was trying to put my finger on but couldn't get the word. I definitely think that religion and prayer are most likely a coping mechanism of some sort. A good question i like to ponder is whether this coping mechanism has overstayed its welcome.

 

[Snow Queen]

If religion spiritually helps you be a better person, helps you get through your day, helps you cope with the harsh realities of life, then pray away. For people its as much as way of being Zen as it is talking to their God.

This is pretty much how I feel. Believe in Zeus for all I care, if it makes you a nicer person, go for it. I still think it's silly but, again, if you're a nicer person because of it, sure. The problem is, unfortunately often, it seems, religion is used as a cover for hatred (homophobia, misogyny, transphobia, racism, hatred of other religions). That and, while I feel you can believe in whatever God you want and I don't really care, I do have a problem with believing things like the Bible, which has a lot of problems within it and passages that are very obviously not inspired by any kind of deity and only there because someone powerful or writing it wanted everyone to agree with their hatred or rules by making it "divine" and "inspired" by having it in the book.

 

[regwec]

I'm afraid to say I think all religion is harmful to some extent, because it facilitates people thinking in a lazy and illogical way. I think the dangerous short-termism employed by policy makers owes something to people's readiness to believe whatever they think feels nice.

 

[NickNitro]

Absolutely Gotham, growing up as a Catholic I have slowly started to detach myself from the Church. Fortunately our new Pope seems to actually have a sense of morality. He was quoted in saying "Who am I to judge?" when the question of Homosexuality came up. This is such a massive step towards religious and social equality.

I believe the great lie in our existence is that one religion is better or more right than the other. In fact its the opposite, unless we all come together as a people, they are all equally as evil.

 

[Marvolo]

I'm afraid to say I think all religion is harmful to some extent, because it facilitates people thinking in a lazy and illogical way. I think the dangerous short-termism employed by policy makers owes something to people's readiness to believe whatever they think feels nice.

About the only religion I have studied that I don't find to be harmful in some capacity is Buddhism. Its just a beautiful peaceful way of living and a way of life I would be happy experiencing.

 

[Marvolo]

Absolutely Gotham, growing up as a Catholic I have slowly started to detach myself from the Church. Fortunately our new Pope seems to actually have a sense of morality. He was quoted in saying "Who am I to judge?" when the question of Homosexuality came up. This is such a massive step towards religious and social equality.

I believe the great lie in our existence is that one religion is better or more right than the other. In fact its the opposite, unless we all come together as a people, they are all equally as evil.

I have always been fascinated by the catholic church, and im really liking this new pope. I really hope he is pope for a while cause he could do good things for the church.

 

[NickNitro]

Me too, he's an incredible breathe of fresh are. Hopefully he will be Pope for a very long time. He seems more of a man of God than a man of the Vatican.

I'm afraid to say I think all religion is harmful to some extent, because it facilitates people thinking in a lazy and illogical way. I think the dangerous short-termism employed by policy makers owes something to people's readiness to believe whatever they think feels nice.

You may be right, religion is harmful when radicals are involved. But anything is harmful when there are radicals involved. Personally I don't have faith "because it feels nice" You love something because it makes you feel good inside, because you believe in it, you believe in the message it sends (good or sadly......bad) You believe that it makes you a better person. That's why I like to have faith because it guides me to be a better person, not because I want to push it on anyone, or really care what they believe in. Religion is very selfish to me, I do it for me and no one else.

 

[regwec]

About the only religion I have studied that I don't find to be harmful in some capacity is Buddhism. Its just a beautiful peaceful way of living and a way of life I would be happy experiencing.

In these sense that I describe, Buddhism is as harmful as the others, because it encourages illogical thought and withdrawal. It doesn't have such a bleak record for intolerance, persecution and genocide as Christianity or Islam, but I think it remains unhelpful to human progress.

 

[NickNitro]

Really? So because Buddhists aren't finding the cure for cancer, or flying to outer space, they aren't benefiting the human progress?

Poverty, government control and oppression, corporate greed, pollution, please, finding spiritual oneness is the least of humanities worries.

 

[nouan]

I do believe the bible still tells you to stone homosexuals to death or something like that... but it's good if this new Pope has decided to interpet the text from a new perspective. I hope he comes to this conclusion about condoms, which according to Vatican's own research, actually increased the chance of getting AIDS... And they of course tell that to the uneducated people in Africa. They do so much good there.

 

[Marvolo]

Really? So because Buddhists aren't finding the cure for cancer, or flying to outer space, they aren't benefiting the human progress?

Poverty, government control and oppression, corporate greed, pollution, please, finding spiritual oneness is the least of humanities worries.

I'm of the opinion that buddhism and its ideas are very helpful towards human kind's psychological development. Scientists have actually done studies of meditations effects, and it is amazing. Sixty-three percent of those who meditated for a month or two showed increased empathy towards other beings. Not just towards humans, but beings in general. It also decreased selfishness.

 

[regwec]

Really? So because Buddhists aren't finding the cure for cancer, or flying to outer space, they aren't benefiting the human progress?

That's a deeply offensive comment- plenty of Buddhists are involved in research of both types.

Human progress is a broader concept than the development of technology. Unity, tolerance, and the development of a politics founded on longterm challenges are other aspects- and religion is the enemy of all of that.

Poverty, government control and oppression, corporate greed, pollution, please, finding spiritual oneness is the least of humanities worries.

It's a form of burying one's head in the sand, which allows most other ills precipitated by the powerful to continue.

 

[NickNitro]

Meditation is very very powerful phenomenon. People of the highest degrees who can truly tap into areas of the mind that normal human beings can't find peace like we normal folk will never know.

 

[nouan]

Really? So because Buddhists aren't finding the cure for cancer, or flying to outer space, they aren't benefiting the human progress?

Poverty, government control and oppression, corporate greed, pollution, please, finding spiritual oneness is the least of humanities worries.

I agree with you that Buddhism is the least troublesome religion. But that karma is a *****. I mean if bad things happen to you, you probably deserved it because you did something wrong in the previous life. That's my understanding of it anyway. But it really is not as harmful as other religions. Not even close.

 

[NickNitro]

That's a deeply offensive comment- plenty of Buddhists are involved in research of both types.

Human progress is a broader concept than the development of technology. Unity, tolerance, and the development of a politics founded on longterm challenges are other aspects- and religion is the enemy of all of that.

So why are you attacking them? I'm pretty sure they show more tolerance and unity than any of us will ever know possible.

 

[Marvolo]

That's a deeply offensive comment- plenty of Buddhists are involved in research of both types.

Human progress is a broader concept than the development of technology. Unity, tolerance, and the development of a politics founded on longterm challenges are other aspects- and religion is the enemy of all of that.



It's a form of burying one's head in the sand, which allows most other ills precipitated by the powerful to continue.

Buddhism is about bettering the human condition. That is hardly burying ones head in the sand. Buddhism is also about unity and tolerance and co existing peacefully. If anything our way of life would be much better if we took more from buddhism.

And Siddhartha did not regard Buddhism as a religion. It is a way of life that he handed down. There aren't even deities in buddhism.

 

[NickNitro]

Yeah I was about to say that too. Buddhism is a way of life, like being a Vegan. Its a way to connect with the planet and beings on a deeper spiritual level. I think everyone should listen to Alan Watts or read his books. He's been renowned for being the best Eastern philosopher interpreter to Western civilization.

 

[Snow Queen]

Absolutely Gotham, growing up as a Catholic I have slowly started to detach myself from the Church. Fortunately our new Pope seems to actually have a sense of morality. He was quoted in saying "Who am I to judge?" when the question of Homosexuality came up. This is such a massive step towards religious and social equality.

That's how I felt when I heard the news...but then I read his quote:

"If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge?"

"The problem is not having this orientation," he said. "We must be brothers. The problem is lobbying by this orientation, or lobbies of greedy people, political lobbies, Masonic lobbies, so many lobbies. This is the worse problem."

The first part in particular implies that he only doesn't judge them if they are also seeking God.

Then the second part, I'm not too sure if he understand how it may come off or if this is his intention but, to me, it comes off as if he is saying they shouldn't be lobbying for equal rights.

And I absolutely agree with the last part of your message that I cut out.