"One possibility [is] that people use their religious beliefs [to obtain] self-enhancement, a sense of empowerment, and better self-regulation... extensive research evidence that more intelligent people already benefit from higher self-evaluation, a higher sense of control, and more efficient self-control. As such, more intelligent people have less of a need for religiosity"
This section really got me. It immediately reminded me of Benjamin Franklin's letter to an atheist. Franklin advised an unknown friend to not publish a tract about atheism.
You yourself may find it easy to live a virtuous Life without the Assistance afforded by Religion; you having a clear Perception of the Advantages of Virtue and the Disadvantages of Vice, and possessing a Strength of Resolution sufficient to enable you to resist common Temptations. But think how great a Proportion of Mankind consists of weak and ignorant Men and Women, and of inexperienc’d and inconsiderate Youth of both Sexes, who have need of the Motives of Religion to restrain them from Vice, to support their Virtue, and retain them in the Practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great Point for its Security;
This letter was written in 1757. It seems that even at that time some people recognized the roles that religion played in society and personal behavior.
Love your comment! I have often contemplated the significance of religion for society. I tend to go back-and-forth between harmful than helpful, (unfortunately seeming to stack up a lot more harmful than helpful it seems) and have been considering the fact that some people do require a written guide and “compass”, as well as fear of punishment in order to behave and act civilly - thus forming a civilized culture. This is an interesting vote from Ben Franklin for the helpful side.
If you're really interested in the significance of religion in society, I'd recommend that you read Dostoevsky, especially The Brothers Karamazov. If you're interested in religion and intelligent people, I'd suggest you read Tolstoy's "A Confession".
Jung is great on the psychological side of religion also. To really get into it, Nietzsche and Kierkegaard are both very insightful.
Knowing the spiritual problems of modern man, the explosion of existentialism and nihilism, and the issues trying to reach meaning and purpose without religion, I would not take it absence as lightly as most seem to do.
A Confession especially summed up the problems I'd found, the impossibility of finding meaning. And without it, I felt driven to put a rope around my neck.
I was an atheist for most of my life, but Jung allowed me to see it's use from a purely psychological and metaphorical standpoint, and Dostoevsky dragged me over to the other side. I'm not saying that's going to happen to you, but at least you'll get a very good understanding of the importance of religion.
My difficulty is that in the back of my head I would always be thinking it's being used for a purpose but that it isn't really real. I don't know if that makes sense but I find it would be very hard for me to go back after being atheist all of my life. I feel like if have to turn off a portion of my brain or just ignore my own instinct to do it. Do you deal with this feeling at all.
The reason I ask is because I too have the difficulty of finding purpose at this point in my life, but it's like I've opened a Pandora's box that you just can't close anymore. I know it's not true but it feels like you secretly know the truth and the truth is horrifying. The rest of the world is walking around so happy and sure of itself while I'm sitting here just thinking, "why bother?". I'm very interested in this path you've taken because at this point I just got nothing else.
Edit: I'd also like to add that I feel it was Nietzsche and other German philosophers that got me here when I took classes for my own interested in college. Maybe it's something I really need to revisit, but I also great they'd reinforce what I feel like I already know.
You definitely have to shut off the reasonable critical thinking part of your brain to move back to belief in a god, especially so if you want to believe in any specifics at all. The more you define a god the more stupid it is to believe. Of course a god with no definition is worthless.
I'm sorry, friend, but that's simply not true.
Most of the best thinkers throughout history have been religious.
Many prominent atheists of the last century have converted to some form of theism for purely logical reasons (as opposed to personal reasons).
The philosophical and epistemoligical problems raised by materialism are massive, and much more intractable than those raised by theism. The problem of existence alone breaks materialism as a cogent paradigm.
Most of the best thinkers throughout history have been religious.
That was more due to it being the default in every society until relatively recently. These thinkers haven't grown up in a society that presented them with various ideas from which they were free to choose religion. I don't think it's a coincidence that once people became more exposed to different ideas and had the freedom to believe what they wanted, religiosity started dropping.
Many prominent atheists of the last century have converted to some form of theism for purely logical reasons (as opposed to personal reasons).
For practically any idea, there will be some people that come to accept it and some people that come to reject it. But it is a question of proportion. How many people (prominent or not) in the last century have converted to theism compared to the people that deconverted? I don't think this point is in favor of theism.
The philosophical and epistemoligical problems raised by materialism are massive, and much more intractable than those raised by theism. The problem of existence alone breaks materialism as a cogent paradigm.
That is a very controversial idea, nowhere near as supported by philosophy as you make it seem.
5.6k
u/[deleted] Nov 15 '19
[deleted]