Discussion turns to argument the nearer discussion comes to a person's "unknown," which people tend to fear. That is, people tend to fear the words: "I don't know". And what people do not "know" are elements of existence they have yet to experience. Peace

People also talk of experiencing the numinous. You can get that visiting nature or listening to an orchestra play (there are endless possibilities).
— Tom Storm

Of course you can. But some people can't.Or that isn't enough for them. And they need God as to feel that way. So what's the problem if they do? I can't see any. — dimosthenis9

In religion there is necessarily an intermediary or higher authority that requires faith, and that authority holds all the cards. Maybe you’re familiar with the proverb that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. In any case, the same suppression of independence applies here as it does to moral development, or any other aspect that leads to independence, so transcendence, the actual experience of it, is not encouraged, and in many cases is deliberately suppressed.

Cause at least (even with wrong way, imo of course) they have answered to their existential questions! — dimosthenis9

Some may indeed have. They are usually those who have seriously studied their religion and/or have a religious/spiritual guide, usu. a priest. But the great majority, even those who "live by the bible" I believe, have not actually solved anything. They live in an illusory religious world, based on an illusory God. By "illusory God" I mean --and I'm referring speak for the prevailing religion in my country, Greek Orthodoxy-- the God as it is presented by the Church and the vast relevant Greek Orthodox literature, including the school books.

Despite all these religions and Gods, we STILL face a huge chaos in society — dimosthenis9

Exactly. This is the proof that the religion of the masses has never been able to solve any problem, except from a blind obedience to the Word of God, the Church, the 10 commandments, etc. which act as an obstacle to Man's immorality and the excesses that Man is predisposed to, as well as a remedy to his primordial fears. Marx was not wrong stating that "Religion is the opium of the people". It kind of acts as a hypnotic, a drug!

Questions:

1. So are we sure that world would be a better place without religions? — dimosthenis9

It depends what one means by a "better place" and what (kind of) religions one talks about. From a materialistic view, dogmatic religions (such as those I described above) provide some safety and control in a society. From that aspect, I really don't know what this place would be if they didn't exist! What I know is that, because exactly of their dogmatic and suppressive nature, they can't set Man free, neither lift him to a higher spiritual level and real knowledge. But there are a lot of religions, esp. Eastern ones, and most importantly Buddhism which I consider in general a non-dogmatic and "practical" religion, with many "schools", which are not considered "sects" or "heresies" to be fought as it happens with Christianity, and esp. Greek Orthodoxy, which pursues them!

2a. If you gonna make people stop believing in religions then WHAT could replace God? — dimosthenis9

I don't think that God must be replaced by anything, except maybe some Supreme Being, Infinity ... the name doesn't really matter. Because we don't need to speak about God to be religious! And by religious I mean mainly, having 1) spiritual values and views (transcendental knowledge, worldviews) that count more than material ones, and 2) moral values (ethics).

2b. How can you convince people to be "good"? — dimosthenis9

"Good" means ethical (moral) and ethics have to do with behaving for the greater good. This is based on common sense. So, to convince people to be "good", you have to convince them to apply common sense! So, simple? Not at all. Common sense is something so difficult to apply that sometimes I wonder if there is such a thing! :smile: It means thinking and acting rationally. And we know that rationality is not people's cup of tea, and even if they were pursuing it, there is so much (mental) aberration in Man that that it is very difficult, if not impossible, for him to achieve a rational stablity!

But the great majority, even those who "live by the bible" I believe, have not actually solved anything. They live in an illusory religious world, based on an illusory God. By — Alkis Piskas

I don't judge if their solution is right (imo it's not at all).But even with "illusions" , as you say, they still gave some existential answers, to themselves. On the other hand, I m condemned to burn in the curiosity's hell.

From that aspect, I really don't know what this place would be if they didn't exist! — Alkis Piskas

Well my fear is that chaos would be even bigger. Since I already mentioned the low average humanity's intellectual level,even nowadays.

Buddhism which I consider in general a non-dogmatic and "practical" religion, — Alkis Piskas

I consider Buddhism also as the most practical religion of all.

Because we don't need to speak about God to be religious! And by religious I mean mainly, having 1) spiritual values and views (transcendental knowledge, worldviews) that count more than material ones, and 2) moral values (ethics). — Alkis Piskas

I get your point,but for me when I say God I mean religions also.

So, to convince people to be "good", you have to convince them to apply common sense! So, simple? — Alkis Piskas

As most things in life, it is so simple after all indeed. But as most things in life also, the huge difficulty comes from putting that "plan" in action!

It means thinking and acting rationally. And we know that rationality is not people's cup of tea, and even if they were pursuing it, there is so much (mental) aberration in Man that that it is very difficult, if not impossible, for him to achieve a rational stablity! — Alkis Piskas

That's exactly what I mean when I support that humanity's average intellectual level, make religions still useful nowadays.

That is, people tend to fear the words: "I don't know". — 1 Brother James

True.

We agree on some matters, we disagree on others. And you can't just accept it. — dimosthenis9

We do not "disagree" on interpreting the same, relevant facts. You conspicuously grasp much fewer of the 'facts of religion' than I (and quite a few others here) do; apparently, this thread discussion makes clear, you're so uninformed that you don't even recognize how uninformed you are and yet you're trying to discuss these matters with others who are much more informed. You don't "disagree" with me, dimo9; you just reject or misinterpret what you're unfamiliar with and don't understand. It's not "dogmatic" of me to repeat statements (you've) not shown to be untrue based on facts of matter or lapses in my logic. Of course, you are entitled to your "opinons" just as I am entitled to dispute those uninformed opinions (and vice versa), which is the basic etiquette of informal public discussion.

this thread discussion makes clear, you're so uninformed that you don't even recognize how uninformed you are and yet you're trying to discuss these matters with others who are much more informed. You don't "disagree" with me, dimo9; you just reject or misinterpret what you're unfamiliar with and don't understand. It's not "dogmatic" of me to repeat statements (you've) not shown to be untrue based on facts of matter or lapses in my logic. Of course, you are entitled to your "opinons" justcas I am entitled to dispute those uninformed opinions (and vice versa), which is the basic etiquette of informal public discussion. — 180 Proof

You are a total waste of time.

In every response I bomb you with arguments, which you never reply or respond. And all you do is repeating insults and implying how much "informed" your precious self is.

I'm tired of stripping your weak, lame, shitty arguments off (when you rarely offered some actually).
Arguments like "Bible urge people to go kill others!". Better shake your head a little.Might help!

I just wish you to act like that only here in TPF and not in your real life .For egoistic reasons as not to admit anything. That's what most people do. They deal a discussion as a fight to "who is right". And they don't give a fuck about getting useful outcomes!
Well if you act and discuss like that in real life also, then pity for the people around you.

In any case,i m done with you. Go play with someone else.

You're my piñata, kid. As long as you keep spouting nonsense on a public forum like you have on this thread, I'll call you on it whenever I'm bored enough to bother

In every response I bomb you with “arguments” — dimosthenis9

Just thought I’d show you a proper use of scare quotes. Carry on!

If you say so.

It’s suspicious that from the start you praise the value of logic or reasoning according to strict rules of validity, and yet in action behave as though you don’t value it at all.

Of course you can. But some people can't.Or that isn't enough for them. And they need God as to feel that way. So what's the problem if they do? I can't see any. — dimosthenis9

Hey... I thought we were going to wait until engaging again? :smile:

I don't really care if people believe in God. In fact, one of my closest friends is a Catholic Priest.

That's only your opinion. Respected but I think I do indeed. It's my most precious value.

Well I had itches in my fingers. I had to respond. Couldn't hold it.

Though as to be honest I also thought that I should wait to engage with you in another thread, since that's what we "agreed" . But I had to take it out of me. Sorry.. Hahah

But I had to take it out of me. Sorry.. Hahah — dimosthenis9

That's ok. As long as we both behave, that's fine.

That's only your opinion. Respected but I think I do indeed. It's my most precious value. — dimosthenis9

That is exactly what someone who doesn't care about the truth says. If you were interested in the truth you might ask me to substantiate my claim or try to disprove it yourself, but no, you just say that it's my opinion.

Scrolling backward, a few notable items from the previous page:

If one wants to make a claim or statements regarding the OP, do so, but back it up from a logical point of view with universally valid reasoning and evidential facts on why the claims or statements are relevant and logical and therefore it is true. That is philosophy. — Corvus

to which dimosthenis9 replies with:

In fact we have the Tank of Logic in our side. Covering our back. — dimosthenis9

but not before admitting:

I always claim that these are my personal opinions, not necessary right. — dimosthenis9

Surely you can see how silly this looks.

That is exactly what someone who doesn't care about the truth says. If you were interested in the truth you might ask me to substantiate my claim or try to disprove it yourself, but no, you just say that it's my opinion. — praxis

Man please! Pretty please!! From the moment I opened that thread it consumes crucial time of my day responding to comments. Cause when I open a thread I m passionate about it and truly bothers me in my real life thought in general! And I don't just make joke and spam like others do.

You want me to tell you what when you tell me such things?!?! To agree that yes I don't follow Logic since you said so??

Take all my posts in that thread from the beginning and show me where the fuck I don't follow Logic or else please stop breaking my balls. Really please!
Now you just accused me, for not asking you why? Thing that you could do it immediately with your first post. But no, you preferred the silly "quote" joke and second post to just accuse me for no Logic! Are you serious??

Surely you can see how silly this looks — praxis

You have a problem or something? When you know that there is no way to have and know the Absolute Truth then yes some of the things are just personal opinions and nothing else.

You want me to say that I hold the "Holly Truth Cup" and my opinions are always right?!?!?

It's Pure Logic. Wanna take you serious with comments like that??

You have a problem or something? — dimosthenis9

Yes, I have a problem with the way you claim to value logic but do not express that value in action. It is an incongruity that creates distrust, in me at least.

A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false. An opinion is an expression of a person's feelings that cannot be proven. Opinions can be based on facts or emotions and sometimes they are meant to deliberately mislead others.

Yes, I have a problem with the way you claim to value logic but do not express that value in action. — praxis

It is my last effort with you. SHOW me where I do that! Before you told me to ask you why you said so? And I DID. And you come again with empty hands!
So last chance. Show me or please stop spamming!

@praxis I think this clown is a previously banned member. A Dunning-Kruger poster child. :smirk:

You wish. The only reason I respond you now is cause you are so damn sneaky and awful that you try to spoil my name! Shame on you.
No I m not a ex-banned member idiot.
Bye for good now!

Alright, starting with your facts from the OP.

1. I'm an atheist.

2. The vast majority of people worldwide believe in God.

3. Despite all these religions and Gods, we STILL face a huge chaos in societies. An enormous one! ​

Given these facts, that the vast majority of people in the world are religious and that there is enormously huge chaos in societies, it seems reasonable to speculate that religion is doing nothing to alleviate this enormously huge chaos, and may in fact be significantly contributing to it.

If that's a valid theory, why the hell would we want to try figuring out a replacement?

I think this clown is a previously banned member. A Dunning-Kruger poster child. :smirk: — 180 Proof

:razz:

Given these facts, that the vast majority of people in the world are religious and that there is enormously huge chaos in societies, it seems reasonable to speculate that religion is doing nothing to alleviate this enormously huge chaos, and may in fact be significantly contributing to it.

If that's a valid theory, why the hell would we want to try figuring out a replacement? — praxis

But have you seen ever the world without religions as to be sure that less chaos would occur??
How can you be sure that mess without religion wouldn't be bigger?? I haven't seen it either. And that's why I mention that it's only my opinion and can't be sure!

Atheists always focus on the bad things that religion brings (which are many I don't doubt), but they don't see any good that comes from them.
Tell me please, you find logical that such a humanity "invention" as religions offer nothing good as people to keep it and maintain it till nowadays??Is it possible one issue like religion to have Only bad things??

And yes I still believe that with the way people behave and their intellectual level religions offer a huge "moral pillow" to societies.
That pillow though, me personally as atheist, I don't find it good enough. And I wonder, then what else?? Suppose human stop advising religion and God for moral values. Then how can they be convinced to act good in societies??? Is it even possible? All these are my questions.

Many many theists act and behave good CAUSE of their belief! And I can't make that I don't see that, just cause I'm an atheist! As I attribute chaos in societies cause of religions! I should attribute the good attitude of many theists to religion also. It would be totally unfair if I didn't!

And after writing all that stuff and spend my time answering to you, just noticed your new ridiculous post, mocking me. Well I won't delete it. But it would better if you go and play with 180. No use to waste more of my time for you.

Soon to be banned. :sweat:

But have you seen ever the world without religions as to be sure that less chaos would occur??
How can you be sure that mess without religion wouldn't be bigger?? I haven't seen it either. And that's why I mention that it's only my opinion and can't be sure! — dimosthenis9

We can look at data for clues. I just looked up some statistics and out of similar size nations, Sweden is the least religious (17% feel it is important in daily life) and Somalia is the most (100% feel it is important in daily life). Which country would you rather take your family on vacation?

Tell me please, you find logical that such a humanity "invention" as religions offer nothing good as people to keep it and maintain it till nowadays??Is it possible one issue like religion to have Only bad things?? — dimosthenis9

I've pointed out that the functional value of religion is in maintaining a strongly bound community. If you look at the etymology it's in the very name, religare "to bind fast". A tightly bound community is a well-established survival strategy. The world has changed a lot over time, however, and what was once a good strategy may not be well adapted to the current situation. Our craving for fat and sugar, for example, isn't well adapted to our current lifestyles.

And yes I still believe that with the way people behave and their intellectual level religions offer a huge "moral pillow" to societies.
That pillow though, me personally as atheist, I don't find it good enough. And I wonder, then what else?? Suppose human stop advising religion and God for moral values. Then how can they be convinced to act good in societies??? Is it even possible? All these are my questions. — dimosthenis9

I think several members have been trying to disabuse you of the notion that religion is about morality. It seems pointless to keep trying.

And after writing all that stuff and spend my time answering to you, just noticed your new ridiculous post, mocking me. — dimosthenis9

You don't actually seem to be taking any of this seriously, and you're free to mock in return.

Sweden is the least religious (17% feel it is important in daily life) and Somalia is the most (100% feel it is important in daily life). Which country would you rather take your family on vacation? — praxis

You pick and compare two extreme national cases, and without any other criteria(social, economic, historical etc) except that their religion belief, as to show how better things in atheists countries are .I find it really wrong and misleading but anyway still I will answer you.

Sweden is one country. Developed one. Most people are above average worldwide intellectual level most probably also. When I mention in my opening thread that vast majority of people are theists I mean obviously worldwide. And below average intellectual level, obviously worldwide again.

A tightly bound community is a well-established survival strategy. The world has changed a lot over time, however, and what was once a good strategy may not be well adapted to the current situation — praxis

And that is Exactly the reason I opened that thread. As to explore IF and what we could do different nowadays as to unwrap morals from religion in modern societies. Where is our disagreement on that?

I think several members have been trying to disabuse you of the notion that religion is about morality. It seems pointless to keep trying. — praxis

So you believe also that through all humanity history so far, morals haven't come out of religion?? And from where then??
Vast majority of people are theists. These people with what kind of morality they raise their kids?? They are theists but when it comes to morals, they follow a different path for raising their kids? What is even the most used phrases that parents say to their kids? "Be a good boy. God watches" "Do your pray before going to bed". That has nothing to do with morals aw??

Seems totally unreasonable someone to claim that religion has nothing to do with morals, to me at least.

You don't actually seem to be taking any of this seriously, and you're free to mock in return. — praxis

I don't mock anyone for his opinions. It's not my style and I respect every opinion as long as someone express it with a polite and not an insulting way.
Told you before I m not here for fun. I m genuinely interesting about these matters. That's why spammers get so much in my nerves.

You pick and compare two extreme national cases, and without any other criteria(social, economic, historical etc) except that their religion belief, as to show how better things in atheists countries are .I find it really wrong and misleading but anyway still I will answer you. — dimosthenis9

Naturally I compared the lowest to the highest, and I prefaced it by saying that it only offers a clue. Still, you have to admit that it would be odd if the more stable country turned out to be 100% claiming that religion felt important in their daily lives compared to one with 17%.

And that is Exactly the reason I opened that thread. As to explore IF and what we could do different nowadays as to unwrap morals from religion in modern societies. Where is our disagreement on that? — dimosthenis9

We don’t need to unwrap morals from religion in modern societies. Also, you’re looking to supplant God, as the title of this topic indicates. You’d hardly be the first to want that. People have been jockeying for that position since the whole rigmarole began. [always wanted to use ‘rigmarole’ in a sentence like that :blush: ]

So you believe also that through all humanity history so far, morals haven't come out of religion? — dimosthenis9

You seem to be implying that religion has existed though-out humans history and helped to shaped our evolution.

Seems totally unreasonable someone to claim that religion has nothing to do with morals, to me at least. — dimosthenis9

I said it’s not about morality. I didn’t say that it has nothing to do with morality. Again, I’m claiming that it’s about strongly binding a community. Morals are an important part of that, but the narrative can shift to rationalize whatever a religious authority requires.

Sweden is the least religious (17% feel it is important in daily life) and Somalia is the most (100% feel it is important in daily life). — praxis

A more apples to apples comparison is, ceteris paribus, the US (72% religious) to Sweden (17% religious) and the respective level of living standards in each country according to the UNDP wherein it's been reported for many decades to be higher in Sweden (as well as all of very secular Scandanavia (6 countries, ave. 27% religious)) than in the significantly less secular US.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/523631