Tau.Neutrino said:
mollwollfumble said:
Tau.Neutrino said:
11 Ways Religion Is Destroying Humanity
Religion has been a part of humanity since the first astronomers peered into the sky and created elaborate stories to define the movements of our universe. It made its way into our minds as we fearfully created devils and demons to explain the danger lurking in the darkness of night. It has both enchanted and burdened us as we attempt to define our world with the information available to us as we work our way through history.
1.) The assumption of truth.
2.) The promise of reward.
3.) The superiority complex.
4.) The usefulness of control.
5.) The distraction of division.
6.) The threat of theocracy.
7.) The illusion of love.
8.) Justification for inequality.
9.) The subjugation of advancement.
10.) The fear of “end times”.
11.) The oppression of terror.
more…
Please prove to me, scientifically, that religion exists.
Isn’t that like saying prove that spirituality exists?
What would proving religion exists involve ?
A consensus asking specifically that question ?
Looking around the web there are lots of articles on the subject
Does Religion Exist?
http://www.worldhistory.biz/ancient-history/60288-does-religion-exist.html
Does Religion Exist?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2011/03/does-religion-exist/
Why do religions exist and what is their purpose to society?
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-religions-exist-and-what-is-their-purpose-to-society
Why Does Religion Exist?
https://www.thoughtco.com/why-does-religion-exist-250557
Will religion ever disappear
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20141219-will-religion-ever-disappear
Thanks for those links. From the first link:
“While most modern theorists of religion accept that a dialectic exists between ritual and religion,”
Brushing teeth is a ritual, but it isn’t a religion.
“Asad argues that the concept of religion is derived from nineteenth-century European understandings of secularism.”
Interesting.
“By creating a category of human experience called religion, Asad argues, anthropologists made two fundamental mistakes. First, they removed power and contestation from the analysis of religion; religion became a disembodied structural phenomena. Second, anthropologists universalized this problematic category onto all societies in the world. In so doing, they ascribed a problematic category for understanding Western religion into contexts in which the concept of religion, or often even the word religion, was completely lacking.”
I find myself agreeing with this. Not entirely agreeing, because I’ve read Herodotus, but mostly agreeing.
“Before studying non-Western religions, colonial scholars first attempted to identify the religious elements of non-Western societies.”
Agree. Almost all colonial scholars were missionaries, which made them invent native religions where none was present.
“Severin Fowles (2013) has used Asad’s insights to reinterpret the Pueblo religion in the southwestern United States”.
Good on him!
“some archaeologists following a more structural perspective do the opposite; they expand the concept of religion to include almost everything. By rejecting the Durkheimian distinction between the sacred and the profane, they begin to equate religion and culture.”
Feel free to redefine religion as much as you like, you’re agreeing that the “sacred” aspect of religion doesn’t exist.
“The problem with this perspective is the growing recognition that some societies, even traditional societies, have only a limited interest in things religious”.
Yep.
“Once we reject the idea that the only function of ritual is to communicate religious beliefs”
Yep, sometimes it’s for brushing teeth. Or, as the article says, for the making of utilitarian metal objects.
“While seemingly contradictory, I see value in all of these different modern perspectives on what religion is or is not.”
I agree.
Now, back to the original post, it is not religion that is destroying humanity, it is lies.