6 ms·

It's very trendy these days to only point to the negatives of religion but if you view religion as a social technology, you can work backwards from the assumpti

It's very trendy these days to only point to the negatives of religion but if you view religion as a social technology, you can work backwards from the assumption that every one of those practices initially solved some problem. For example it turns out that giving daily thanks helps us stay positive in the face of arduous times - especially given that our human history was full of disease, war, poverty and famine. Personally I'm not convinced that the vacuum left behind by going to church (and having a community) has been well replaced yet and instead our collective religious tendencies have been steered towards identity politics and idol worship by social media instead. I'm not religious in the slightest but my mother is a harmless Christian and when I see how a little bit of faith anchors her and make sense of a world that is completely unrecognisable to the one she was born into (she didn't even have a fridge let alone an iPhone lol) I am always reminded to stay humble and open minded

mandymoorefan 2y ago
“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?” ― Friedrich Nietzsche
- AStonesThrow 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - tiberious726 2y ago
    He didn't catch syphilis until much after he wrote that ...
    - snorin 2y ago
      He never "caught syphilis", and the horse story is also dubious at best. The truth is that we're never going to know what really happened to Friedrich Nietzsche.
      - tiberious726 2y ago
        What are you talking about? It's well documentation and studied: https://www.amacad.org/publication/daedalus/syphilis-nature-nietzsches-madness https://www.amacad.org/publication/daedalus/syphilis-nature-...
        snorin 2y ago
        While the syphilis theory is plausible, I believe the congenital brain disease inherited from his father is the more widely accepted theory nowadays. As for the horse story, apparently it comes from a tabloid paper that was never exactly known for their reputability. The "gossipy" undertones become very clear when you read the article for yourself.
TulliusCicero 2y ago
> you can work backwards from the assumption that every one of those practices initially solved some problem. This isn't quite right. The true version of what you're getting at is, "at some point every practice was useful to someone", but just because someone or someones found it useful doesn't necessarily mean it solved a real problem for society overall. E.g. men have dominated over women in almost all pre-modern societies (and even in modern ones there's often a good ways to go), because that was useful and advantageous to men, who also had the physical strength to enforce such a social division. It was never truly about "solving a problem". Sure, in some cases religious practices may have helped with a problem, but in other cases (e.g. indulgences) they were just about gathering or retaining power for the religion, which was certainly useful for the leaders within said religion.
- Unbefleckt 2y ago
  Surely if male dominance was about physical prowess, there wouldn't be any emperors or kings older than 35 before being punched to death by rivals?
  - TulliusCicero 2y ago
    Male dominance as a gender is about physical prowess. That's not the same thing as an individual male person being dominant based on physical prowess. European powers were dominant over other countries and colonized them due to superior weaponry and organized armies that used said weaponry, but that doesn't mean every European leader was a soldier toting around a gun themselves.
- djtango 2y ago
  I'm not here to deny those things - I'm not really qualified to argue in either direction. I wanted to focus on some of the good religion brings, even if you're not religious. In any case power capture is just another one of those axiomatic things of the human condition for me. After all, democracy and capitalism is being contorted into neo-feudalism in our own lifetimes. My point was that even though they seem silly to nonbelievers, I suspect a lot of people would probably be happier spending an hour a day singing hymns and reciting prayers. It turns out singing can be a pretty good mind-body hack for making you feel happier. And prayers are a pretty good presence of mind hack for regaining focus
Frummy 2y ago
I really agree, religion unlocks a lot for a lot of people. I have transcendental beliefs that have been of service. Acknowledging that, some organisations use others conscience against them to control them. Some make the decision selfishly, some think the ends justify the means, and some just do it without being aware of it. There’s a whole spectrum of benefit, some benefit their members a lot and I think we can safely say that most cults do not in the end benefit their members.
- Aeglaecia 2y ago
  most people get lost on the way to factorizing religion which explains your being downvoted ... although the devil plays many tricks it is always a choice to give up one's own soul , a good teacher doesn't expect that ...
  - Frummy 2y ago
    Yeah thanks, I tried to say I’m not criticising religion It was a literal cult I’ve read like hundreds of articles and regrets of members and experienced first hand discussions that are manipulative and withholding information and rationalising political stuff with scripture that anyone would just have to experience to get why it’s manipulative and exploitative, it won’t come across online as easily So it’s a lot of research into the brainwashing funnel of a type of cult that I was talking about and not religion at large
    - Aeglaecia 2y ago
      it's a shame really the tool held it purpose for many years and still does even in acting the savage from brave new world ... unfortunately for souls in desperate need of hope life is not shared victory, there is only winner takes all (c.f. tool - vicarious) ... imo community and higher standards are integral to intellectual advancement regardless as to the implementation ... we are witnessing eroding of both, to the detriment of those cheering said erosion ...
amenhotep 2y ago
Religions are memetic organisms subject to survival of the fittest and this strikes me as similar to a fallacy present in thinking about genetics and evolution as the idea that evolved features must have some use otherwise they wouldn't have evolved. Sometimes animals just do be like that, since it doesn't harm their fitness, and it seems likely to me that the same is true for most features of religions.
- TulliusCicero 2y ago
  The bigger issue imo is the assumption that because something is effective/useful this must necessarily "solve a problem (for society)".
  - djtango 2y ago
    I am someone who enjoys challenging the status quo and am generally living unconventionally but I think we've swung too far in the opposite direction of being skeptical of practices of our forebears. For example it is suddenly all the rage to study the health benefits of breathing or meditation. But this has been common knowledge amongst yoga and qigong practitioners for 1000+ years. If you are scientifically minded, a lot of the explanations of how qigong works are hard to reconcile but if you actually try it earnestly you'd realise there's something there. Sure, a 1000 year old model has the wrong explanations, but all models are wrong some are useful. Empiricism gives us so much false confidence when we often still can't measure many things and often don't know what to measure. Especially so when real true reproducible science is hard, slow, and expensive. So for me, starting from a prior "maybe people do do this thing for a reason even if they themselves have forgotten why" can be useful
    - TulliusCicero 2y ago
      > But this has been common knowledge amongst yoga and qigong practitioners for 1000+ years. Okay, but there's also "common knowledge" amongst practitioners of yoga or qigong or other traditional practices that's complete bullshit. There's good reason to not just accept that traditional practices must be smart automatically. > If you are scientifically minded, a lot of the explanations of how qigong works are hard to reconcile but if you actually try it earnestly you'd realise there's something there. I'm guessing they're less "hard to reconcile" and more "completely made up".

mandymoorefan 2y ago

“God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?” ― Friedrich Nietzsche

AStonesThrow 2y ago
[flagged]
- tiberious726 2y ago
  He didn't catch syphilis until much after he wrote that ...
  - snorin 2y ago
    He never "caught syphilis", and the horse story is also dubious at best. The truth is that we're never going to know what really happened to Friedrich Nietzsche.
    - tiberious726 2y ago
      What are you talking about? It's well documentation and studied: https://www.amacad.org/publication/daedalus/syphilis-nature-nietzsches-madness https://www.amacad.org/publication/daedalus/syphilis-nature-...
      - snorin 2y ago
        While the syphilis theory is plausible, I believe the congenital brain disease inherited from his father is the more widely accepted theory nowadays. As for the horse story, apparently it comes from a tabloid paper that was never exactly known for their reputability. The "gossipy" undertones become very clear when you read the article for yourself.

TulliusCicero 2y ago

> you can work backwards from the assumption that every one of those practices initially solved some problem. This isn't quite right. The true version of what you're getting at is, "at some point every practice was useful to someone", but just because someone or someones found it useful doesn't necessarily mean it solved a real problem for society overall. E.g. men have dominated over women in almost all pre-modern societies (and even in modern ones there's often a good ways to go), because that was useful and advantageous to men, who also had the physical strength to enforce such a social division. It was never truly about "solving a problem". Sure, in some cases religious practices may have helped with a problem, but in other cases (e.g. indulgences) they were just about gathering or retaining power for the religion, which was certainly useful for the leaders within said religion.

Unbefleckt 2y ago
Surely if male dominance was about physical prowess, there wouldn't be any emperors or kings older than 35 before being punched to death by rivals?
- TulliusCicero 2y ago
  Male dominance as a gender is about physical prowess. That's not the same thing as an individual male person being dominant based on physical prowess. European powers were dominant over other countries and colonized them due to superior weaponry and organized armies that used said weaponry, but that doesn't mean every European leader was a soldier toting around a gun themselves.
djtango 2y ago
I'm not here to deny those things - I'm not really qualified to argue in either direction. I wanted to focus on some of the good religion brings, even if you're not religious. In any case power capture is just another one of those axiomatic things of the human condition for me. After all, democracy and capitalism is being contorted into neo-feudalism in our own lifetimes. My point was that even though they seem silly to nonbelievers, I suspect a lot of people would probably be happier spending an hour a day singing hymns and reciting prayers. It turns out singing can be a pretty good mind-body hack for making you feel happier. And prayers are a pretty good presence of mind hack for regaining focus

Frummy 2y ago

I really agree, religion unlocks a lot for a lot of people. I have transcendental beliefs that have been of service. Acknowledging that, some organisations use others conscience against them to control them. Some make the decision selfishly, some think the ends justify the means, and some just do it without being aware of it. There’s a whole spectrum of benefit, some benefit their members a lot and I think we can safely say that most cults do not in the end benefit their members.

Aeglaecia 2y ago
most people get lost on the way to factorizing religion which explains your being downvoted ... although the devil plays many tricks it is always a choice to give up one's own soul , a good teacher doesn't expect that ...
- Frummy 2y ago
  Yeah thanks, I tried to say I’m not criticising religion It was a literal cult I’ve read like hundreds of articles and regrets of members and experienced first hand discussions that are manipulative and withholding information and rationalising political stuff with scripture that anyone would just have to experience to get why it’s manipulative and exploitative, it won’t come across online as easily So it’s a lot of research into the brainwashing funnel of a type of cult that I was talking about and not religion at large
  - Aeglaecia 2y ago
    it's a shame really the tool held it purpose for many years and still does even in acting the savage from brave new world ... unfortunately for souls in desperate need of hope life is not shared victory, there is only winner takes all (c.f. tool - vicarious) ... imo community and higher standards are integral to intellectual advancement regardless as to the implementation ... we are witnessing eroding of both, to the detriment of those cheering said erosion ...

amenhotep 2y ago

Religions are memetic organisms subject to survival of the fittest and this strikes me as similar to a fallacy present in thinking about genetics and evolution as the idea that evolved features must have some use otherwise they wouldn't have evolved. Sometimes animals just do be like that, since it doesn't harm their fitness, and it seems likely to me that the same is true for most features of religions.

TulliusCicero 2y ago
The bigger issue imo is the assumption that because something is effective/useful this must necessarily "solve a problem (for society)".
- djtango 2y ago
  I am someone who enjoys challenging the status quo and am generally living unconventionally but I think we've swung too far in the opposite direction of being skeptical of practices of our forebears. For example it is suddenly all the rage to study the health benefits of breathing or meditation. But this has been common knowledge amongst yoga and qigong practitioners for 1000+ years. If you are scientifically minded, a lot of the explanations of how qigong works are hard to reconcile but if you actually try it earnestly you'd realise there's something there. Sure, a 1000 year old model has the wrong explanations, but all models are wrong some are useful. Empiricism gives us so much false confidence when we often still can't measure many things and often don't know what to measure. Especially so when real true reproducible science is hard, slow, and expensive. So for me, starting from a prior "maybe people do do this thing for a reason even if they themselves have forgotten why" can be useful
  - TulliusCicero 2y ago
    > But this has been common knowledge amongst yoga and qigong practitioners for 1000+ years. Okay, but there's also "common knowledge" amongst practitioners of yoga or qigong or other traditional practices that's complete bullshit. There's good reason to not just accept that traditional practices must be smart automatically. > If you are scientifically minded, a lot of the explanations of how qigong works are hard to reconcile but if you actually try it earnestly you'd realise there's something there. I'm guessing they're less "hard to reconcile" and more "completely made up".