Religion is not evil

[Legend]

Is there someone claiming this?

Maybe. I don't care. There appears to be many people quite attracted to the idea that there has to be an "atheist belief system", or that atheism is a religion just because it has something to do with the topic.

 

[tsig]

If you are going to subdivide "religion" into "what this particular religion believes" then why should you not subdivide "atheism" into "what this particular atheistic belief system believes". Is it possible to be an atheist without subscribing to one of these atheist belief systems? Of course it is, just as it is possible to be religious without subscribing to a particular formal religion.



There are plenty of people who have only a vague idea of what they might believe in. In fact, religious belief is far more likely to be vague because it deals in things that are ill-defined and unimaginable.



And you for some reason only want to consider what the religions do, and ignore the atheistic belief systems.



Can I use that for future examples of the over-stretched analogy?

If we want to find out if medicine works, we compare what happens when people take the medicine with what happens when people don't take the medicine. A test that only dealt with one and not the other wouldn't tell us whether the medicine was very good.

If you want to know if religion is, in a general sense, good or bad for society, you have to look at societies with and without religion.

I'm referring to disagreements directly related to atheist or religious belief systems, not just belief systems that don't relate directly to religious belief.

Is there someone claiming this?

Well, someone is and they seem to have your name.

 

[Egg]

Well, someone is and they seem to have your name.

westprog did carefully define his terms and at no point has suggested that atheism is a belief system. When he talks about an atheist or atheistic belief system, he's referring to a belief system that includes no god beliefs or in some cases, more specifically, the belief in no gods.

It might make sense to argue that you don't like the term for that definition for some reason or possibly to ask for clarification on what actually comprises a "belief system" and do we all have one? But to try to suggest he's saying something that he isn't is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate attempt at misrepresentation.

 

[tsig]

westprog did carefully define his terms and at no point has suggested that atheism is a belief system. When he talks about an atheist or atheistic belief system, he's referring to a belief system that includes no god beliefs or in some cases, more specifically, the belief in no gods.

It might make sense to argue that you don't like the term for that definition for some reason or possibly to ask for clarification on what actually comprises a "belief system" and do we all have one? But to try to suggest he's saying something that he isn't is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate attempt at misrepresentation.

I see, when he uses a term like "atheist belief system" it doesn't mean that atheists have a belief system just a belief system that includes no gods.

Seems like a distinction without a difference.

 

[Akhenaten]

I'm trying to find an actual argument in this post, which is quite lengthy - and I don't see one. There's assertion, there's expletive, there's self-justification - just no arguments. That might be why nobody asks you to explain yourself. There's nothing to explain.

Could be.

I've given you a detailed, annotated, referenced explanation of why communism can be considered an atheist belief system. Your response, above - in the only part of the post which even approaches an argument - is "describing communism as an atheistic belief system is wrong".

Well there you go. You managed to get something out of it after all.

Well, that's clear enough. Why anyone should find it convincing I don't see. I've pointed out in detail the ways in which communism is a philosophical as well as a political and economic system. I've pointed out the precise philosophical link to atheism. I've given direct quotes from Marx and Lenin. Your substantive response, apart from the above, has been a reference to a priest who was a Marxist, though you failed to establish that he was both at the same time.

Oh?

I hope you'll be able to provide a link to the post where I did that. It sounds interesting.

I wouldn't rely on the popular vote for your strategy of argument. People generally find the arguments most convincing when they reinforce somebody's own opinions. If you've converted anyone then you should be pleased with yourself.

I am.

<-- artist's impression

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

I think they are religious. I also think that Marxism is atheistic. That's the significant point.

What does 'atheistic' actually mean to you? That it contains atheism?

Even if that's the case it also contains several other philosophies, ideologies and belief systems.

The things aren't comparable at all, and the only reason you seem to have introduced this argument here is to obfuscate and distract.

Let's simplify.

My argument is that religion is 'evil' because religions freely and enthusiastically actively promote horrible things which are unnecessary. They could easily stop doing this without losing any of their religiousity if they wanted to but they don't.

Your counter argument is that religion is not 'evil' because... Communists. Seriously?

 

[Trent Wray]

What are the ingredients you need to make nonspaghetti ?

If you say ... "nonspaghetti doesn't exist" you're an atheist.

If you begin to lay out recipe guidelines with ingredient necessities, you've got a religion.

 

[westprog]

westprog did carefully define his terms

But I've found that this makes no difference.

and at no point has suggested that atheism is a belief system. When he talks about an atheist or atheistic belief system, he's referring to a belief system that includes no god beliefs or in some cases, more specifically, the belief in no gods.

In fact, I've been very strict in only including belief systems that have quite explicitly made the non-existence of God part of the system, and have it there in writing.

It might make sense to argue that you don't like the term for that definition for some reason or possibly to ask for clarification on what actually comprises a "belief system" and do we all have one? But to try to suggest he's saying something that he isn't is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate attempt at misrepresentation.

I think that what is going on is a campaign against a conspiracy to denigrate atheism. Or something. It seems more like a worthy cause than a disinterested search for truth. My hidden agenda is to be revealed from behind my weasel words.

 

[westprog]

I see, when he uses a term like "atheist belief system" it doesn't mean that atheists have a belief system just a belief system that includes no gods.

Seems like a distinction without a difference.

Since I've very carefully explained repeatedly and in detail exactly what I mean, there's not really any excuse for not knowing it.

 

[westprog]

What does 'atheistic' actually mean to you? That it contains atheism?

Even if that's the case it also contains several other philosophies, ideologies and belief systems.

The things aren't comparable at all, and the only reason you seem to have introduced this argument here is to obfuscate and distract.

Let's simplify.

My argument is that religion is 'evil' because religions freely and enthusiastically actively promote horrible things which are unnecessary. They could easily stop doing this without losing any of their religiousity if they wanted to but they don't.

Your counter argument is that religion is not 'evil' because... Communists. Seriously?

My italics. "Religion" is evil. Because of what certain "religions" believe. The reasoning appears to be that one can characterise the general from the particular.

A religion is a religious belief system - a system of belief that incorporates religious ideas. I've established that there are corresponding athiest belief systems, and that at least one such belief system is responsible for similar, or possibly worse abuses.

The vagueness of the "religion is evil" idea means that's it's not obvious how to counter it. However, I think it is certainly valid to look at societies that have this view, how they've dealt with religion, how they regard religion, and how this has affected people's lives.

For some reason, the people promoting "religion is evil" don't want to look at how the alternatives to religion work out. If it's a social paradise in Scandanavia, that's fine. That's an example they can live with. If it's something they don't like, then they don't want it considered at all.

"Religion is evil" is a concept that could be explored and investigated as a way of looking at a way of improving society - or it could just be used as a way for atheists to feel a little bit superior.

 

[westprog]

What are the ingredients you need to make nonspaghetti ?

If you say ... "nonspaghetti doesn't exist" you're an atheist.

If you begin to lay out recipe guidelines with ingredient necessities, you've got a religion.

Would you ever specify a recipe according to what it leaves out?

I think that it's at least valid to taste your soup to see if it tastes better with or without salt - and just how much is best. I don't think it's enough to throw in a cupful of salt, taste, and say "salt is bad - leave it out".

 

[Leumas]

In reply to the OP


I really think that everyone should do themselves a favor and watch this video.

Just substitute the word scientology for ANY RELIGION you would care to think about.

Anyone who does not think that ANY AND ALL religions are BLOODY CULTS they are kidding themselves. ALL religions are CULTS just like scientology...the only differences are the number of followers and how long they have been around.

If you cannot spend the two hours then I suggest at the very least you watch the following minutes. Just remember that it is not JUST scientology....but ANY RELIGION that he could have been talking about...ANY...

Item #2 and towards the end of the video where he talks about how all the people are nice people who want to help I think addresses the OP's main point.

1. 0:17:50 to 0:25:00 where he talks about how sorry he was to have wasted so much time and effort on an EMPTY THING
2. 0:31:30 to 0:32:30
   and
   0:48:00 to 0:50:00 where he asserts that the people in the cult are nice people who just want to help
3. 0:41:38 to 0:43:00 he talks about how retarded it is
4. 0:44:00 to 0:48:00 he talks about how people justify things for themselves because they are invested in them.
5. 1:31:00 to 1:34:00 he talks about the SLAVES who dedicate themselves to the service of the leaders and the cult because they want to save the planet
6. 1:47:30 to 1:52:00 he talks about how he feels bad he helped in brain washing people and how people are SELF-ENSLAVING
7. 1:51:50 to End where he talks about how to DE-CONVERT this section is of PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE to watch.

 

[westprog]

I must have lived in a different commie Poland then. The country was (and still is) staunchly catholic, packed churches, parades and all. Even pope John Paul II visited once, 1979, I believe.

Further to my other point - is it claimed that Poland would have been better off in 1979 if it had been staunchly atheist? How would that have affected history?

 

[Fascination]

"Belief" can be used different ways. There's belief based on evidence, subject to change as evidence changes. For example, "I believe we have some milk, but let me check the fridge. No, the kids must have used it up. We're out."

Then there's belief held without evidence, or even in the face of contrary evidence, a deep-seated and important attitude. For example, "I believe that all people are created equal, and I can picture the day that we will all have the same rights and opportunities."

Theists are usually using the second meaning when they talk about their religious beliefs. If that's also how they're using it when they talk about atheism, that can be insulting to the kind of atheist who would be perfectly willing to change his mind if he checked the fridge and found a god in there. It implies close-mindedness in the face of evidence, which is praised among religious people because it's an example of keeping the faith despite temptation, but is not something that a lot of atheists enjoy being accused of.

Thank you!!! I describe myself as just lacking belief in any gods, I don't say that they definitely don't exist.

 

[tsig]

Since I've very carefully explained repeatedly and in detail exactly what I mean, there's not really any excuse for not knowing it.

Can you post a link to any post where you did that? So far all I've seen is you trying to equate non belief in god to belief in god.

 

[westprog]

Can you post a link to any post where you did that? So far all I've seen is you trying to equate non belief in god to belief in god.

I could go back through all my posts and go over them with you to explain exactly what I mean, yes.

Am I going to do this? No.

Will you claim that this just proves you right? Well, I don't know. I just know that my expectation is that going over everything again wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference.

 

[RedRatSnake]

I just know that my expectation is that going over everything again wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference.

Has any of the posts that try and point out that religion is really useless swayed you at all ?

 

[tsig]

Well, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and explain it just one more time.

A belief system that includes, as a necessary element, the existence of god is a religious belief system.

A belief system that includes, as a necessary element, the non-existence of god is an atheistic belief system.

Other belief systems don't include or exclude the possibility of god. I wouldn't describe those as religious or atheistic.

A belief system that explicitly claims that atheism is true, together with other elements, can reasonably be described as an atheistic belief system. Marxist communism undoubtedly qualifies in both theory and practice.

Claiming that atheism is just the absence of belief doesn't affect this. Communism is much more than just the absence of a belief in god. It includes all kinds of beliefs about the nature of human society. It is quite obviously a belief system, and it's quite obviously atheistic. To claim the contrary is merely perverse.

I could go back through all my posts and go over them with you to explain exactly what I mean, yes.

Am I going to do this? No.

Will you claim that this just proves you right? Well, I don't know. I just know that my expectation is that going over everything again wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference.

Judging from your post above you do consider atheism a belief system yet somehow you wish to claim you don't.

 

[westprog]

Has any of the posts that try and point out that religion is really useless swayed you at all ?

I suppose that if AWP's OP didn't have any effect, then I doubt whether anything I say would make a difference.

No, I wasn't persuaded by the assorted "religion is evil" posts, because of the extraordinary lengths people have gone to to avoid addressing AWP's points, and later, mine.

For example, Leumas posted a video which refers to scientology, and insists that this must necessarily stand as a rebuke to every possible religious impulse. This is clearly an example of a gross generalisation - and yet he refuses to even accept Marxism as an example of atheism in particular. This isn't remotely persuasive. I'm sure that he will find people to agree with him who agreed with him before the discussion started.

 

[Arcade22]

Not always, anyway. Religion gives millions (billions!) of people all over the world comfort and hope in a world that seems bleak and uncaring.

The world IS bleak and uncaring. There's nothing honorable about lying, misleading people in order to make them feel better. There is no afterlife. There are no gods or angels to care for you. The only mature thing to do is to accept that rather than to dream up a false fantasy world.

This movie doesn't end the way we want all the time. What pitiful individual would, in the face of rationality and everything the world has shown them, continuously deny reality in favor of delusion? Oh - The Christian. The Muslim. The Jew.

Many if not most religions include charity as a cardinal virtue. This drives people to genuinely work for the betterment of others. It's an interesting fact that the places where people state that religion is most important to them overlaps quite strongly with areas that are poor and most in need of charitable work.

The poor, uneducated and botched individuals who eke out a pathetic existence with nothing but poverty and personal failing are naturally i need of something to help them forget their squalid lives and to go somewhere free from pain and hurt, mammals as they are. Some choose the relaxing and enveloping bubble of painlessness that heroin offers, others the false promise of a perfect god given afterlife.

Which is more lamentable?

Churches are perfectly placed to provide aid and development to these areas. They have an already-established community and infrastructure, and while it is true that some faith organisations provide aid with evangelical strings attached, many of the largest ones such as World Vision and Caritas subscribe to a code of conduct which ensures that evangelical work and development work are kept firmly separate.

I'm tired of the relentless antitheism that is displayed not only on this forum, but in the skeptical community as a whole. Let's not seek to utterly destroy a source not only of comfort, but of much-needed charitable work. Instead, let's try and weed out the unethical and immoral aspects of religion and harness the good to make this a better world for everyone.

There's no need to vainly embellish religion. Religions corrupt the minds of their believers and nothing, NOTHING will make that acceptable in any way. Not charity. Not justice. Not morality. Nothing.