4 ms·

This is an obtuse thing to say. Religion is simply being used as a cover to exact the will of people. You can remove religion, they’ll find a different rallying

This is an obtuse thing to say. Religion is simply being used as a cover to exact the will of people. You can remove religion, they’ll find a different rallying point and organize around it. And they have. In this day and age, we ought to know better than to blame religion for what are ultimately negative actions done by people who have mental problems.

0134340 3y ago
Religious apologists have used this excuse for ages to try to invalidate those who criticize it but it's a really naive take to say that religion has no manipulative influence on people whatsoever. And in a different conversation, the religious are generally sure to admit that it has had manipulative influence on them.
- ChainOfFools 3y ago
  I think the point being made is that a religion is just an idea a bunch of people have. It doesn't have a mind of its own, Religion writ large doesn't either,. To blame religion is to take away the agency, and the accountability, of the people who actually do take action on these ideas.
  - 0134340 3y ago
    I think you missed my point. Many religious people would say that their religion provides agency for them and you can't deny it, in itself, isn't an agent of forces, for better or worse.
  - paulmd 3y ago
    > a religion is just an idea a bunch of people have. It doesn't have a mind of its own, Religion writ large doesn't either, it literally does and that’s the point of it as a memetic complex. It is quite literally the “mind of its own” that ensures its memetic survival. lmao @ the concept that large masses of everyday people all independently choose to not wear mixed fabric because they each performed a reasoned analysis of the facts and determined that poly-cotton blends are a threat to a 20th century society. Like that’s just facially ridiculous as a concept - of course religions have a mind of their own. This isn’t an empty point either, when religions make “yeah, it’s good to stone people to death for having sex with other men” as a tenent in their holy books then you are going to see that show up in people’s belief structures. It’s not just a one-way street from people’s personal feelings into the religion, the religion itself has a significant if not majority influence for deep believers. And while some people will buck the holy book (“the Old Testament doesn’t count” etc) - the reality is that most people will not, because that’s apostasy. Or at most they will abandon a few key precepts and keep the rest (“the gays can live, but marriage is still an inherently religious institution” etc). Go around a church and ask people and you will find the overwhelming majority believe in the overwhelming majority of their religion’s precepts. Because that’s why they’re there in the pews. It’s as ridiculous as claiming the US government “doesn’t have a mind of its own” - we have elections of course, so in principle people get the government they want, but it also doesn’t mean it doesn’t have things where it’s completely out of step (drug policy etc) and it certainly doesn’t change the fact that if J Edgar Hoover is coming after you (read: vigorously enforcing the legally ratified will of the people’s duly-elected representatives) that it’s gonna feel a whole lot like the USG has a mind of its own. The whole point of governments and corporations and religions is precisely that they have a will of their own. They are living creatures - self-executing colony organisms. Memes and systems of rules instead of genes. That’s why they exist and why they work and why they hold real power in the world.
jackcosgrove 3y ago
I agree religion is almost always a pretext. However I disagree that our problems are caused by people who have mental problems, or some other distinct group. I blame human nature, which while capable of social behavior is at root selfish and hypocritical.
- whoswho 3y ago
  We are saying the same thing.
Retric 3y ago
Religions do adapt to the times, but they aren’t simply reflecting the current will of the people. Current pork prohibitions for example date back thousands of years. The only way they could simply reflect the will of the people is if they had no influence whatsoever.

0134340 3y ago

Religious apologists have used this excuse for ages to try to invalidate those who criticize it but it's a really naive take to say that religion has no manipulative influence on people whatsoever. And in a different conversation, the religious are generally sure to admit that it has had manipulative influence on them.

ChainOfFools 3y ago
I think the point being made is that a religion is just an idea a bunch of people have. It doesn't have a mind of its own, Religion writ large doesn't either,. To blame religion is to take away the agency, and the accountability, of the people who actually do take action on these ideas.
- 0134340 3y ago
  I think you missed my point. Many religious people would say that their religion provides agency for them and you can't deny it, in itself, isn't an agent of forces, for better or worse.
- paulmd 3y ago
  > a religion is just an idea a bunch of people have. It doesn't have a mind of its own, Religion writ large doesn't either, it literally does and that’s the point of it as a memetic complex. It is quite literally the “mind of its own” that ensures its memetic survival. lmao @ the concept that large masses of everyday people all independently choose to not wear mixed fabric because they each performed a reasoned analysis of the facts and determined that poly-cotton blends are a threat to a 20th century society. Like that’s just facially ridiculous as a concept - of course religions have a mind of their own. This isn’t an empty point either, when religions make “yeah, it’s good to stone people to death for having sex with other men” as a tenent in their holy books then you are going to see that show up in people’s belief structures. It’s not just a one-way street from people’s personal feelings into the religion, the religion itself has a significant if not majority influence for deep believers. And while some people will buck the holy book (“the Old Testament doesn’t count” etc) - the reality is that most people will not, because that’s apostasy. Or at most they will abandon a few key precepts and keep the rest (“the gays can live, but marriage is still an inherently religious institution” etc). Go around a church and ask people and you will find the overwhelming majority believe in the overwhelming majority of their religion’s precepts. Because that’s why they’re there in the pews. It’s as ridiculous as claiming the US government “doesn’t have a mind of its own” - we have elections of course, so in principle people get the government they want, but it also doesn’t mean it doesn’t have things where it’s completely out of step (drug policy etc) and it certainly doesn’t change the fact that if J Edgar Hoover is coming after you (read: vigorously enforcing the legally ratified will of the people’s duly-elected representatives) that it’s gonna feel a whole lot like the USG has a mind of its own. The whole point of governments and corporations and religions is precisely that they have a will of their own. They are living creatures - self-executing colony organisms. Memes and systems of rules instead of genes. That’s why they exist and why they work and why they hold real power in the world.

jackcosgrove 3y ago

I agree religion is almost always a pretext. However I disagree that our problems are caused by people who have mental problems, or some other distinct group. I blame human nature, which while capable of social behavior is at root selfish and hypocritical.

whoswho 3y ago
We are saying the same thing.

Retric 3y ago

Religions do adapt to the times, but they aren’t simply reflecting the current will of the people. Current pork prohibitions for example date back thousands of years. The only way they could simply reflect the will of the people is if they had no influence whatsoever.