Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump TopicReply to this topicRSS feed Start new topic Start Poll

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> Can religion be replaced?, Why, or why not? (Social Issues)

lshsl
post Yesterday, 07:17 PM
Getting Started
**
Group: Junior Member
Posts: 123

Joined: Jul 2011
If you want something to replace religion, you go to meet the underprivileged group. You will find humanity.

Many religion founders and philosophers has met the underprivileged group and understand their sufferings. They are inspired to uphold the humanity. Religions and ideologies are to serve this purpose.

Without humanity, religion is a cult.
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
L the Different Observer
post Yesterday, 10:07 PM
On my way
****
Group: Senior Member
Posts: 509

Joined: Jan 2016
Beneath and behind all religions' believe, there are something that we all can learn further.

Take BOOK OF ENOCH for example, a holy book that described more than just god's teaching, because that book also mentioned FALLEN ANGEL, INHUMAN BEINGS as well as mysterious elements and land mass.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SpikeMarlene
post Today, 08:16 AM
Look at all my stars!!
*******
Group: Senior Member
Posts: 5,620

Joined: Mar 2008
QUOTE(L the Different Observer @ May 24 2017, 10:07 PM)
Beneath and behind all religions' believe, there are something that we all can learn further.

Take BOOK OF ENOCH for example, a holy book that described more than just god's teaching, because that book also mentioned FALLEN ANGEL, INHUMAN BEINGS as well as mysterious elements and land mass.
*
How do we know what is written in the BOOK is true or real?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hoka Nobasho
post Today, 09:50 AM
Getting Started
**
Group: Junior Member
Posts: 198

Joined: Jul 2016



QUOTE(fablefox @ May 23 2017, 01:17 PM)
Correct.

I have to say that I'm a muslim.

However, in this conversation  context, I'm not talking about whether its real or not (which is why I gave Flying Spaghetti Monster as an example). It just that religion is entrenched enough, based on historical past (Prophet Muhammad p.b.u.h exist - the theoretical part is another thing).

And because its faith and not science, you just can't use logic. And religion can cause people to kill or blow themselves out.

You know what, lets step back and use politic as an example, because at times, people religiously stick to in-group  and follow their own echo chamber.

- Comey (FBI head) talks about Hillary email last minute. Some people said this caused Hillary to lose election.
- Hillary and democrats want Comey fired because they said he is biased.
- If Trump allow Comey to stay, and Comey said that Trump is innocent, Democrats would say "of course Comey would say that, look at how he behave near election causing Hillary to lose. He is BIASED!!".
- So Trump is between rock and hard place. But since everyone already said that Comey is biased, and should be fired, and no integrity (there are videos of who's who saying this and also received recommendation to fire Comey, so he fired Comey.
- Democrats went "Why you fired Comey?"

People can't think clearly when it come to politics, you can practically forget about religion - because its based on idea so far out (but has it basis - but that another religion support science debate).

As for moral, it has became to what is legal and what is not - and that basically based on what lawmakers / leaders wanted. That is why in the case of Stanford prison experiment , when they allowed to do what they do, they done it.

I hope that help clears things out, unless I misunderstood the topic.
*
I still think you have indeed misunderstood the point of the topic. Nobody has said anything about the distinction between faith and science. The question posed was rather straightforward: "Can religion be replaced?" --> Why, or why not?

However, if the reasoning that I have laid out for you are correct as you have put it, allow me to address to each of them:

QUOTE
1) People can never stop asserting that there'll always be a god somewhere (no matter where that may be), and


Yes, this is now considered normal, as the concept of a god and religion do provide some sort of comfort, even if it is based on a lie, due to the lack of evidence.

QUOTE
2) Religion will always be around and cannot irreplaceable because nothing else that we have today can ever replace religion


Why is that so? What are the criteria that religion has that it is practically irreplaceable? More importantly, if religion is indeed replaceable, wouldn't that logically means there wouldn't be any atheists in the first place? There are plenty of atheists who can live without religion, so I don't see the logic of religion being presumably "irreplaceable".

QUOTE(puchongite @ May 23 2017, 06:16 PM)
They want to promote something, they have to promote something which is satisfy the needs. Obviously art, science and others do not fit the bill. They have to do a art++, science++ in order to meet the requirement, just like in China people promote 法轮功, which does the plus plus to the traditional health exercise until the communist government becomes so fearful of it. If we start adding the "mythical", "powerful", "promise future" etc etc into art or science, then effectively we are creating a new religion.
*
Two questions for clarification:

1) "Obviously art, science and others do not fit the bill."

--- Why is this so?

2) They have to do a art++, science++ in order to meet the requirement

--- What do you mean by adding two "plusses"? Or rather, what are the specific differences of art and science as opposed to art++ and science++?

QUOTE(SAMBWA @ May 24 2017, 12:39 PM)
Apparently so.
*
Not so. What you have quoted was merely what works for personally, which isn't necessarily something that will work for others.

This post has been edited by Hoka Nobasho: Today, 09:51 AM
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hoka Nobasho
post Today, 09:52 AM
Getting Started
**
Group: Junior Member
Posts: 198

Joined: Jul 2016



QUOTE(lshsl @ May 24 2017, 07:17 PM)
If you want something to replace religion, you go to meet the underprivileged group. You will find humanity.

Many religion founders and philosophers has met the underprivileged group and understand their sufferings. They are inspired to uphold the humanity. Religions and ideologies are to serve this purpose.

Without humanity, religion is a cult.
*
If by just meeting the underprivileged group is enough to conceive humanity, why the need for religion in the first place then?
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
puchongite
post Today, 10:11 AM
10k Club
********
Group: Senior Member
Posts: 12,002

Joined: May 2008
QUOTE(Hoka Nobasho @ May 25 2017, 09:50 AM)
Two questions for clarification:

1) "Obviously art, science and others do not fit the bill."

--- Why is this so?

2) They have to do a art++, science++ in order to meet the requirement

--- What do you mean by adding two "plusses"? Or rather, what are the specific differences of art and science as opposed to art++ and science++?

*
What you asked for clarification I have already answered in my previous post. Pure art and science lack the "mythical", "supernatural", "all mighty", "promise future".... elements. And human has appetite for these.

Can performing an appreciation of a piece of beautiful art satisfy that ? Well, some people attempt to do it, then they start saying watching a piece of beautify art from Michelangelo can give you super power, or listening to Tchaikovsky has healing power, able to cure cancer or hanging Mao Ze Dong big poster picture in the house can lead the country's to promising future. So when all these elements are added, then those things have by definition become a religion.

This post has been edited by puchongite: Today, 10:11 AM
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hoka Nobasho
post Today, 10:34 AM
Getting Started
**
Group: Junior Member
Posts: 198

Joined: Jul 2016



QUOTE(puchongite @ May 25 2017, 10:11 AM)
What you asked for clarification I have already answered in my previous post. Pure art and science lack the "mythical", "supernatural", "all mighty", "promise future".... elements. And human has appetite for these.

Can performing an appreciation of a  piece of beautiful art satisfy that ? Well, some people attempt to do it, then they start saying watching a piece of beautify art from Michelangelo can give you super power, or listening to Tchaikovsky has healing power, able to cure cancer or hanging Mao Ze Dong big poster picture in the house can lead the country's to promising future. So when all these elements are added, then those things have by definition become a religion.
*
Hmm. Are you by any chance implying that "over-promising reality" provides a a certain "high" or pleasure that art, science, and philosophy couldn't? A beautiful painting obviously can't promise anything that is magical, but it would appear that telling a person with exaggerated lies and promises, would somehow benefit the person more, and that is what religion could do where others could not.

Should we, as a society, ask people to stop indulging in such a "high" stimulation in order to function properly in society? It would appear that religion is simply just another dangerous drug. Take too much of it, and there'll be suicide bombers.

This post has been edited by Hoka Nobasho: Today, 10:36 AM
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages < 1 2 3Top
Bump TopicReply to this topicTopic OptionsStart new topic
 

Switch to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0892sec    5.91    5 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 25th May 2017 - 11:15 AM