copernicus

I certainly agree with that, but that is not what I have been doing. I have been saying that just pointing out the admitted good acts and intelligence of misguided god-worshippers is intellectually short-sighted. It fails to address the nature of the problem--the mental addiction that can so easily corrupt rational thought.

The same can be said for communism. This is a very common argument from those who want to cling to their dogma even after it has been shown repeatedly to fail in its implementation.

Sabine Grant

Hi Copernicus again.... I agree with the arguments Rad gave you. Of course being both christians we will provide arguments which pertain to demonstrate the effectiveness of faith. I have come to believe that both secular humanism and my faith can be compatible and reach similar goals to improve the human condition. I do not consider faith to be a mental addiction but a mean for an individual to reach personal accomplishments he may not otherwise reach. I was for a time an agnostic with pantheistic sympathies and it certainly did not work for me in terms of sustaining my desire to accomplish certain things. I found strength in my faith.I found the motivation to modify my character and work on attitudes I know to be unproductive. There is in fact no epiphany or glorious feeling of extreme joy involved with that process.
I realize that some christians like to maintain a front of joy and peace thru their practices... but in reality it is a constant process of introspection where a human being evaluates his or her own limitations and finds ways to either accept them or modify them.


The useful prayer of Serenity applies IMO to all christians if they really seek to improve their condition thru faith. The serenity to accept those limitations or the strength to modify them thru God. In either case God's support is the motivation. The serenity comes with the acceptance of not being able to modify certain circumstances and letting go of the need to control them as God will control them.... the strength to modify limitations comes with the faith that God will enable that individual. So both circumstances and limitations are delt with.

What you percieve as mental addiction I value as enabling and liberating from the need to control. Can you assert 100% that a person who dwells on secular humanism would accept with serenity a scenario which would cause global destruction.?One of those where no men can change the circumstances. No science and no knowledge can then overturn the course of nature. The supremacy of the universe takes over suddenly.... explore what your thoughts would be.

You see I pertain to demonstrate that the human need to control circumstances is what causes most of our torment and distress. Faith offers the alternative to let go of that need.....
Looking forward to read your thoughts on that. Veronique.

Radorth

In some people it does and some it does not. Why is that? I think it is because certain people can become addicted to anything, even completely irreligious pursuits. Obsessive personalitiies are not drawn to religion alone, though it is certainly a favorite. Obsessions with sex, money, earthly power and control come with all kinds of masks on. I don't know how you could find a better example of someone yielding up all these things than Jesus. Can we count the quiet Christians who gave up fortunes, illicit sex, worldly power and money trying to follow his example? Is the lowly "religious" widow Jesus made note of, who gave her "last two mites" not our model of humanism?

Sabine's argument that simply giving up control will lead us to peaceful waters is irrefutable, as I think a number of skeptical philosophers have also said. I suppose the value of Christianity will show itself best in those who find strength to simply let go.

'Tis a paltry few religious people who've ever agreed with Paul that "When I am weak, then I am strong." But I think those who understand what he meant would be Christians.

Rad

(Take a Zen course. You'll get it )

copernicus

Calling religious faith a "mental addiction" or a "mental virus" carries a very negative connotation, and I don't wish to offend you by it. There are certainly less benign forms of the addiction than you exhibit, but relgious faith really does behave like a viral infection or an addictive drug. Not all addicts are bad people, but some can become completely detached from their families, their friends, and all other social restrictions that bind human society. That is where the atrocities come in, the disregard for all that human society holds valuable. You can do anything in the name of God, because, after all, what higher purpose could there be? Similarly, you can do anything for that next hit of heroin or cocaine. What better reward could exist in life than the next high? What better reward could there be than eternal bliss in heaven? And you don't need to reexamine your faith, because faith is by definition belief without evidence.

So, in your cases, Sabine and Radorth, you don't kill, torture, or pillage in the name of faith. Most religious people don't. The problem for me is that your restraint is only limited by the particular form that your religious convictions have taken. If you suddenly become convinced that some religious cult has a better "answer", then how far would your faith take you along the path of giving up your previous sane behavior? Personally, I don't know, but it frightens me to think that otherwise sane people could suddenly suffer a crisis of faith and lose all touch with previous moral values. Religious faith is a vector for extreme antisocial behavior, just as drug addiction is. It is the ultimate "get out of jail free" card. Believe in religious creed X, and thou shalt be saved!

That is true for people who lack religious faith, too. The difference is that the introspection of atheists is nominally grounded in the acceptance of natural, observable phenomena. Religious faith invites people to believe in supernatural causes, and it provides no method of verification. You don't need evidence to believe in God. Worse, it short circuits the ability of rational minds to seek natural explanations. The earth can be flat or round, whatever religious doctrine says. Counterevidence is nothing more than God's test of our faith.

Again, I see no way in which lack of religious faith is different. One comes to accept what one cannot change--the ephemeral nature of life. Religion promises something beyond life, however. It removes the need of the individual to accept responsibility for behavior in "this" life, since the reward for god-sanctioned behavior comes in the "second" life.

Absolutely not. My problem is that I cannot assert the same for the person who dwells on faith in God.

But you must see, Veronique, that that is what bothers me the most. One can be an atheist and still accept the limitations that life has to offer. I am mortal. My consciousness revives in my dreams and when I awake. Some day it will not. I accept the limitations of my life. I just want to understand it while I can. Religion robs me of that understanding because it provides no explanations. It is not a cure, but a palliative. Let go of the need, and you give away your most precious possession--your one and only life.