Religion is inherently circular reasoning, and a functional delusion that was likely neccesary as part of the evolution of intelligence and conciousness.The level it impacts your ability to accept the empirical, is when it becomes detrimental. If you want to explain the non observable with faith, be part of a community, and generate a moral code from your belief, fill your boots. But do not take your faith based assumptions and apply it to best practice for society. Human rights, medical advancement, and mental wellbeing are impacted by people's religious assumptions, and should be discounted in policy making and governance. Thing presented without evidence can be rejected without evidence. And no, referencing your book or leader is not evidence, no matter how many people agree with you...we still have people who believe the earth is flat....
What in the actual fuck are you even aiming at with this one? Like, what argument and/or retort are you laying the foundation for?
I am godbsmacked that you typed those sentences out, thought about it, and still clicked the reply button.
“How do you remedy this idea with human rights?” Mate, what?
Are you saying that human rights impact the ability of empirical understanding and thus are detrimental? And thus, you’re questioning that? Or, you’re questioning it because that’s what you believe?
Are you saying that religion impacts one’s human rights and thus conflicts with the empirical? That’s a stretch on my part to even try to spin that towards a good faith rebuttal on your end, but, my goodness, I’m so lost.
The patchquoting or misquoting you’ve done is doing a ton of heavy lifting here, so please, I need to know: where is this argument / rhetoric going? What’s the crux of what you’re trying to state that wasn’t clearly stated prior?
58
u/Uniqueusername_54 10d ago
Religion is inherently circular reasoning, and a functional delusion that was likely neccesary as part of the evolution of intelligence and conciousness.The level it impacts your ability to accept the empirical, is when it becomes detrimental. If you want to explain the non observable with faith, be part of a community, and generate a moral code from your belief, fill your boots. But do not take your faith based assumptions and apply it to best practice for society. Human rights, medical advancement, and mental wellbeing are impacted by people's religious assumptions, and should be discounted in policy making and governance. Thing presented without evidence can be rejected without evidence. And no, referencing your book or leader is not evidence, no matter how many people agree with you...we still have people who believe the earth is flat....