Has Religion Always Been Useless?

[Pirate Utopian]

while i agree religion nowadays is totally useless, religious preachers used religion as a reason to spread reading and writing to countries (example: Islam spreading handwriting in Africa), even if that was only so that could read the doctrines of those religions it was good that it was spread, wasnt it?

my question is do you peeps think reading and writing would have reached those aera's without religion?
or even more was religion always useless?

[Eleutherios]

I bet if religion never existed, I'd be cruising in my hovercar over the Martian terrain with my robot friends right about now...

[Fawkes]

Religious characters actually played a pivotal role in saving the history of Rome after it's sacking by Germanic tribes. Were it not for the Irish monks who traveled around Europe and gathered books from Roman libraries before they were burned to take them back to Ireland to be re-copied and re-distributed, we would not know anywhere near as much about pre-Medieval Europe as we do today. So, I don't know if that would be considered religion itself, but yes, religious persons have played a very important role in history numerous times.

[CNT-FAI]

I tried to post on that thread but the Reply function was not connecting. This is the only online forum i'm having trouble with.

As for the topic, we should also remember the important progressive role often played by religion in the less industrialized countries, especially Latin America. Nicaragua, El Salvador, & Haiti are notable examples. Religious people have often been important in social movements such as the civil rights struggle.. A Protestant minister, Wilberforce, was instrumental in the abolition of the slave trade in the British empire.

Not so major but still worth noting is the Catholic Worker movement (mainly in the US). It has been informed by a strain of anarchism:

http://www.catholicworker.org/

[Eleutherios]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 04:57 pm
yes, religious persons have played a very important role in history numerous times.
Really?!?!

Perhaps it might have something to do with the fact that the vast majority of people throughout history were religious?

[Fawkes]

Or it could be due to the fact that, historically, religious people (i.e. monks) were the most educated and would therefore have an interest in reading and writing and would want to preserve it. (Though that wasn't always the case, look what the Spanish did to Mayan and Aztec culture and history).

[ichneumon]

how is religion useless?

religion is how nationstates come into being, cultural evolution beyond the tribal level. what *planet* are you from????? all early kings were religious leaders, it provides the conceptual unity beyond direct kinship that allows more complex societies. not to mention figuring out calendars, writing, math, etc. religion isn't useless now - in fact, it's DEADLY useful if you want to create a fascist theocratic state.



I bet if religion never existed, I'd be cruising in my hovercar over the Martian terrain with my robot friends right about now...

if organized religion had never existed, you'd be braining your neighbor with an atl-atl right about now. then most likely eating him.

[ichneumon]

[deleted, double post]

[razboz]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 08:27 pm
how is religion useless?

religion is how nationstates come into being, cultural evolution beyond the tribal level. what *planet* are you from????? all early kings were religious leaders, it provides the conceptual unity beyond direct kinship that allows more complex societies. not to mention figuring out calendars, writing, math, etc. religion isn't useless now - in fact, it's DEADLY useful if you want to create a fascist theocratic state.



I bet if religion never existed, I'd be cruising in my hovercar over the Martian terrain with my robot friends right about now...

if organized religion had never existed, you'd be braining your neighbor with an atl-atl right about now. then most likely eating him.
What the fuck? :blink:

Seriously i can agree with you that some leaders in the past have been religious as well as some of the very greatest thinkers of times gone by. These people may have also contributed to the rise of the nation state, but i have serious doubts it was intentional. Religion benefits from backwards societies in that it can exploit the lack of education and scientific background these people had in order to install its hegemony unchallenged.

I agree with patton: Im gonna have to disagree with you when you claim religion is possibly a good thing.. Also try to make it more evident when you are using sarcasm. If not im gonna ave to take that comment as you being some kind of fascist. Which would be unfortunate as i already don't think very highly your theist apologism.

You dont brain ppl with atl-atl's. You use them to throw spears. which is not that important compared to your suggestion that religion is a good thing because you can make fascist theocratic dictatorships

[Pow R. Toc H.]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 08:27 pm
how is religion useless?

religion is how nationstates come into being, cultural evolution beyond the tribal level. what *planet* are you from????? all early kings were religious leaders, it provides the conceptual unity beyond direct kinship that allows more complex societies. not to mention figuring out calendars, writing, math, etc. religion isn't useless now - in fact, it's DEADLY useful if you want to create a fascist theocratic state.
Pshhhhhhhh... Like religion is responsible for the evolution of society, Most practicing religious people deny that any evolution ever really happened! Religion is responsible for the Dark Ages and The Crusades and about a thousand other fucked up things in history! It deserves little to no respect! Think about the countless innocent fucking people that were burned as witches at the hand of stupid prejudicial religous nutcases. Religion= Devolution
Free Thought, Science, Logic= Evolution

[Eleutherios]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 05:53 pm
Or it could be due to the fact that, historically, religious people (i.e. monks) were the most educated and would therefore have an interest in reading and writing and would want to preserve it. (Though that wasn't always the case, look what the Spanish did to Mayan and Aztec culture and history).
That doesn't prove that religion was useful, only that education was. Even the illiterate masses were religious, but if you got to the top of the religious hierarchy you had a chance of learning how to read and write.

[ichneumon]

Seriously i can agree with you that some leaders in the past have been religious as well as some of the very greatest thinkers of times gone by. These people may have also contributed to the rise of the nation state, but i have serious doubts it was intentional. Religion benefits from backwards societies in that it can exploit the lack of education and scientific background these people had in order to install its hegemony unchallenged.

I agree with patton: Im gonna have to disagree with you when you claim religion is possibly a good thing.. Also try to make it more evident when you are using sarcasm. If not im gonna ave to take that comment as you being some kind of fascist. Which would be unfortunate as i already don't think very highly your theist apologism.

i never said it was *good*, just that it is part of the formation of modern nation-states. marxists tend to think feudal societies sprang up out of holes in the ground. no, organised religion is part of this process of the transition between tribalism and feudalism. is feudalism good? well, no, it was evil, but without it, we wouldn't be here.

you never asked if religion were *good*, only useful. i argue that it was necessary. it's not, now, we have political systems based on nontheistic philosophies that hold together our states, and are more useful and inclusive. besides, most organized religions today are outright evil.

agruing my point would involve finding historical examples of nation-states that were founded without using religion as an organizing priciple, and then showing that these states are equally likely to succeed and survive. good luck.

[manic expression]

Religion is not useless, and it is, IMO, shortsighted to say that it is.

Useless to you? Perhaps; useless to countless others? Not even close.

[Invader Zim]

Religion provides hope for those who need it for their insecurities and so forth. For them it is not useless.

[razboz]

Originally posted by Invader Zim+February 28, 2007 08:33 pm--> (Invader Zim @ February 28, 2007 08:33 pm) Religion provides hope for those who need it for their insecurities and so forth. For them it is not useless. [/b]

Book of Razboz @ Allegories 1:17

Two young men is walking down a paths. By the road the first sees an old blind man who has lost his way and is scared and confused. The man asks the traveler where he is and asks him to point him towards the nearest town. The nearest town is many many kilometers away, much too far for the old man to walk. The young man points him in the right direction. As he watches the old man hobble off he has a pang of guilt. But he must continue on his way. As night is falling the second young man meets an old blind woman. She is carrying a loaf of bread and some milk, enough for one. She too is scared and confused. realizing he is as lost and confused as the woman he tells her coolly: "Old woman; the closest town is not so far. But it is too far for you to walk with all that weight on your hands. Allow me to carry some of it." So he holds her bread and milk and they walk side by side a little longer. Suddenly a group of bandits spring out of the bushes and attack the three. The second young man runs off with the bread and milk, followed by the old woman running as fast as her frails legs will carry her. Suddenly a thundering sound is heard from down the path and the old man appears, riding a white charger, accompanied by a group of men from the village and the bandits run off. In the forest the young man and the old woman walk on. "Whe do we arrive" asked the old woman. "Soon" answered the young man. She kept on asking the question and the answer always came "Soon" many hours later the old woman dropped to the ground, dead from fatigue. The young man dined on her bread and milk. and walked on for another day. Finally, he arrived to a town. Calmly he walks up to the Church and tells a boy outside "Go tell the Mayor that all is fine and that the Pastor has returned"

Maybe a bit long, but the Book of Razboz is not known for its conciseness.

[Pirate Utopian]

today religion is useless because if those people wernt religious they would be fine.

[jaycee]

thinking about human history without religion is like saying what would humanity be like without going through Feudalism, slavery , capitalism or even evolution in the first place. It is human nature to look at the natural world and universe in wonderment and therefore to ask fundamental questions about its origin, meaning etc. Under class society this became done in a religious form as one group needed to control the others etc, but it still retained its elements of truth and human nature. Science and progress has allowed us to see where religion was factually incorrect but that doesn't mean that all human endevour and thoughts and experience before modern science is somehow pointless or useless.

Communism will retain the elements of truth and discard the illusions.

[Invader Zim]

Maybe a bit long, but the Book of Razboz is not known for its conciseness.



Or in this case; its relevence.

[Rev29]

the only thing i believe religion served for was uniting people like during the crusades... all europe was united as cathlic .. and all middle east islam... may have not been a good thing. But, they were together. Of coure, they could be united in other ways, but they may have not done so without the common believe of the religion.

[razboz]

Originally posted by Invader Zim+March 01, 2007 01:51 pm--> (Invader Zim @ March 01, 2007 01:51 pm)

Maybe a bit long, but the Book of Razboz is not known for its conciseness.



Or in this case; its relevence. [/b]
Did you never go to Razbozian studies? :blink:

Ill try to explain. The statement was that religion was good because it helps people cope with their crappy lives. In the allegory the old woman needs reassuring the young man (representing the church) reassures her but then steals her stuff and runs away.

Basically thats what the church does. They reassure you and so on, just sos they can get their hands on your riches and make off with them. They are not really helping you. Also the woman who was lied to dies, while the old man lives and helps his helper.

Basically its better to get the truth then to be fooled.

the Book of Razboz puts it quite well:


Originally posted by Book of Razboz @ [email protected] 8:13


He hath truth and no hope, shall be free.
He who hath faith but no truth shall forever remain in chains




Patton
So speaketh the great prophet razboz. biggrin.gif

Damn right he does.

[Liberal Kid]

I'm an atheist but I've grown up in a family of Christians. I may not be religion's number one fan at all but it isn't useless by any means.

You are all also be incredibly arrogant concerning religion. Allow me to bring things into perspective.

Yes religion has been used for many horrible things but, religion has also done many great things.

Which is quite similar to communism, which as it is now only has the potential to do great deeds. But the guise of communism has caused much death.

Now as far as religion goes I don't suppose any you have ever heard of perhaps the Dalai Lama. Take a look at his writings and tell me he hasn't contributed to society.

Religion is what you use it for. It can be corrupted and use for evil, but so can anything else man creates including communism.

At the same time religion has motivated many people to be generous and do good with their lives. So just because religion has been misused by men at various points in history, it has also given much of a humanity a good code of morals regardless of whether or not they wish to follow it.

So try to be less condescending of something that has had such a great impact on history and the world.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by Liberal [email protected] 01, 2007 09:03 pm
I'm an atheist but I've grown up in a family of Christians. I may not be religion's number one fan at all but it isn't useless by any means.
As ichneumon pointed out, it's brilliant at making theocracies and oppressive structures.


You are all also be incredibly arrogant concerning religion. Allow me to bring things into perspective. You will find we're all quite "arrogant" on a lot of things.


Yes religion has been used for many horrible things but, religion has also done many great things. Really?Would these things be necesary in a world without religion. Is it actually religion that makes people do them, or people?


Which is quite similar to communism, which as it is now only has the potential to do great deeds. But the guise of communism has caused much death. This comment could have been copied and pasted from any textbook on how to be a liberal.


Now as far as religion goes I don't suppose any you have ever heard of perhaps the Dalai Lama. Take a look at his writings and tell me he hasn't contributed to society. I have heard of the Dalai Lama and I'm well aware that he's a feudalist prick. Next.


Religion is what you use it for. Religion is a lie and should therfore not be 'used' for anything
It can be corrupted and use for evil, but so can anything else man creates including communism. Define "evil".


At the same time religion has motivated many people to be generous and do good with their lives. There are many other motivators that do not involve falsehoods.
So just because religion has been misused by men at various points in history, it has also given much of a humanity a good code of morals regardless of whether or not they wish to follow it. We can have morals without religion. Religion is, for the most part, a tool to opress and nothing more.


So try to be less condescending of something that has had such a great impact on history and the world. es, but you see religious people are flat out wrong.

[ichneumon]

Religion is a lie and should therfore not be 'used' for anything.... We can have morals without religion. Religion is, for the most part, a tool to opress and nothing more.....Yes, but you see religious people are flat out wrong.

what exactly are you talking about? i really can't see you being objective about religion. how can you honestly and scientifically make such sweeping and all encompassing statements without acknowledging your own prejudice? and then, when people reject communism because of the failures of the soviets, oh, no, that wasn't *real* communism...maybe *real* religion is the human altruistic instinct that makes our societies possible. and frankly, you're not exactly the exemplar of morality without religion.

:P

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 01:34 am

Religion is a lie and should therfore not be 'used' for anything.... We can have morals without religion. Religion is, for the most part, a tool to opress and nothing more.....Yes, but you see religious people are flat out wrong.

what exactly are you talking about? i really can't see you being objective about religion. how can you honestly and scientifically make such sweeping and all encompassing statements without acknowledging your own prejudice?
I acknowledge my prejudice, I am strongly anti-religion as I do not want these lies pedaled by the fucking priests/lamas/imams/whatever.


and then, when people reject communism because of the failures of the soviets, oh, no, that wasn't *real* communism...maybe *real* religion is the human altruistic instinct that makes our societies possible. An instinct can't be a fucking religion, religion is simply a collection of theistic lies and assorted bullshits. Oh yes and religion is not a single set ideology - it's a collection of them (Islam, christianity whatever) and they're all shite.

and frankly, you're not exactly the exemplar of morality without religion. I'm curious now, what have you identified in my behaviors/beliefs that you would consider immoral?

[ichneumon]

I'm curious now, what have you identified in my behaviors/beliefs that you would consider immoral?

you're mean! and nasty! and rude!

seriously, according to my ethical system, which of course is my own, but it's all i have, etc....

"Do no say untruthful things for the sake of peronal interest or to impress people. Do not utter words that cause division and hatred. Do not spread news that you do not know to be certain. Do not criticize or condemn things you are not sure of.Always speak truthfully and constructively. Have the courage to speak out about situtaions of injustice, even when doing so may threaten your own safety."

from Thich Nhat Hahn 14 precepts of engaged buddhism

you do so badly at the first part of the bold, but you're so good at the last part. of course, adhering to that little maxim is utterly impossible, and it's meant to be that way. still, imho, the balance is positive and jazzrat goes to heaven.

:wub: