thomaq

"not the product of biological evolution"? where did they come from then? maybe you were just joking.

Philosoft

I don't think so. Presumably, there is no particular "god-belief gene" that acquires mutations and manifests as different religions.

thomaq

not a "god gene" but the desire for something "higher" or "transcendent" probably evolved. much like the desire for affection or things like that?

Philosoft

Fair enough. My point had more to do with the development of the individual religions themselves, but it doesn't really matter.

thomaq

worthy of attack, sure. but why do it? why not let them go on in their religious irrational stupor and the rational people can focus on other stuff? is it maybe recreational?

Philosoft

If everyone was capable of internalizing their personal theologies, there wouldn't be a problem. But many religions are notorious about giving people an inflated sense of self-righteousness, which makes people think they know what's best for the rest of society, in addition to themselves.

thomaq

right on, that makes sense.

Philosoft

Heh. I thought it might.

Let me just add that I think it is probably the vast majority of the religious public that normally don't seek to use their personal theologies as political leverage. I do, however, think religion lends itself easily to some often less-than-desirable sociological phenomena. In that case, a few clever and persuasive extremist individuals can have an inordinately widespread effect because the moderate public might be unwilling to openly contradict them, for whatever reasons.

thomaq

yep, i agree with that