Thermal
August Member
and their meditative technique used to channel their aggression.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
I'm not religious enough to call myself...
- Thread starter Gawdzilla Sama
- Start date
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Some local Buddhists go off the reservation for reasons that have nothing to do with Buddhism, and suddenly now you don't care for their religion?
People are complex. Not everything in our lives boils down to just one thing. It's possible for a devoutly religious person to stray, due to external pressures on their life, without the religion itself causing or permitting their bad behavior. Atheists are quite fond of calling out Christian hypocrisy, after all.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
My thesis is that religion is fractal. A friend or family member who adheres to flat-eartherism, avidly consumes flat-earther content, and cuts you off because you don't take them seriously, is practicing religion and its failure modes. Including sacred texts, heresy, and excommunication.
I think a lot of atheists insists that religion must have a supernatural element, to avoid having to admit and accept responsibility for all their own ideologically-driven bad behavior.
Thermal
August Member
"I never said I was a good Buddhist..."
I'm religious enough to call myself an atheist, though I am also an agnostic in that I think that is a non-falsifiable claim so I can't really be certain there is no code.
On Buddhism and peace, of the major religions it is probably the hardest of the major religions to justify violence, but humans are extraordinarily capable of justifying whatever we feel the need to for just about any reason. On its face, it's tough to get Jesus to justify violence but folks have. I wouldn't be surprised if there hadn't been Jain inspired violence at some point.
On Buddhism and peace, of the major religions it is probably the hardest of the major religions to justify violence, but humans are extraordinarily capable of justifying whatever we feel the need to for just about any reason. On its face, it's tough to get Jesus to justify violence but folks have. I wouldn't be surprised if there hadn't been Jain inspired violence at some point.
IDK, like many ethnic/sectarian conflicts, it's all pretty intertwined. The were persecuted for not being part are our group, how do we know they aren't, well they aren't Buddhists for one! Not that different from the Balkans or N. Ireland. There were other differences and greivances than religion, but religion was an easy distinction to make.
I do think the branch Buddhism most popular in the west is Tibetan, and the Dali Lama has put a lot of effort in putting the peace and love face forward while quietly ignoring the less palatable bits. Don't get me wrong, good policy on his part.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
The main reason I'm adamant that religion doesn't have to be theistic, and that atheists can be just as susceptible to embracing and manifesting evil ideologies, is because religion is an emergent property of humanity. Theistic ideologies are just a subset of the phenomena.
I tend to agree and think the Soviet Union and Maoism are great examples of non-theistic religions. Fascism, Nazism, MAGAism, are all good examples too.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
I think any definition of religion does have to include a supernatural element, or there is nothing to distinguish religious belief from any other belief. I believe getting enough sleep is important for health, is that a religious belief? Would medical articles on the benefits of sleep count as holy texts, and remonstrating with people who insist that two hours of sleep is sufficent count as finding heresy?
I guess this counts as a religious belief on your part.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
I can see that. Perhaps the requirements for a religion would be:
1. Posits an explanation for an order to existence
2. Carries guidelines on how people should behave
Both lend themselves easily to the supernatural aspect --God made the universe, God will judge you if you sin, etc -- but those others also meet those requirements. Class warfare as an explanation for history, the state as the highest good, the superiority of the race, etc.
Flat eartherism, though, only meets (partially) the first one; apart from "don't believe in astronomy" I'm not familiar with any guidelines for human behavior flat earthers promulgate. There aren't sins against the flat earth, are there? "Thou shalt not...take satellite photographs"?
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2012
- Messages
- 41,155
I understand the point you're trying to make. And while I agree that there are similarities between strongly held beliefs or associations and religions, they are not religions. They can all be nutty. Whether they are Flat Earthers, Antiv-Vaxxers, NAZIs, or Trump-turds.
You're redefining religion to include other groups that are similar and may be as bad. But that doesn't make them religions.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Sure there is. Religious belief includes things like dogmatic adherence to accepted texts (dogma, sacred texts), excommunication of people who don't share the belief, codification of unacceptable interpretations of the dogma (heresy), required expressions of devotion to the belief (autos-da-fe), etc. All of these things can happen even if the belief in question isn't theistic.
Your concern should be whether your belief system is falling into the patterns of a religion, not whether your belief system is explicitly theistic in nature.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
If it has all the failure modes of religion, why not put it in the same category?
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2012
- Messages
- 41,155
My understanding is supernatural elements are required. They definitely can be cult like though. North Korea's founding leader Kim Il Sung was declared by State Propaganda to be divine with miraculous powers. They're government is structured like a religion.
Because of this thread, I looked up a few definitions, the supernatural does seem to be necessary element of the belief system for it to be called a religion.
I say, let's go with cult like, that's a useful term and much like the difference between cults and not cults the exact point were followers of a political ideology vier into something that is almost religious in nature isn't exactly clear. Most folks agree that it is a thing that happens though.
Because eventually you'll want words that distinguish shamans from Star Wars nerds, but we already have those words.
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
I think there are rules for designating as a religion in the US, at least for tax-exempt purposes. Something like, having to have at least three people, a gathering place, and others.
There have been a couple of full cults that started as Maoist political groups too, something about Maoism there.
en.wikipedia.org
Don't forget the larouchites.
Lambeth slavery case - Wikipedia
Don't forget the larouchites.
Last edited:
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
I'm not really concerned about what words we use. My point is about the set of characteristics they refer to, and how, in terms of humans behaving badly because of their ideology, it doesn't really matter whether the ideology is theistic or not. All ideologies, theistic or otherwise, have the same failure modes of bad behavior. Atheists are not exempt from the human condition. Atheists are just as prone to being ideological dickheads as theists.
I use "religion" to describe this for a few reasons. The most important one is that I think it's the best word we have for indicating a dogmatic belief system with certain characteristic weaknesses and failure modes - regardless of whether the belief system in question is theistic or not. I think a person can be religious, and can fall into ideological dickheadery, without joining a cult. Organized religion is only one form of religion, and doesn't hold a monopoly on the dickheadedness that arises from religious fervor.
If you're thinking, "I can't be an ideological dickhead because my ideology isn't theistic", you're ignoring my point.