Ok, i finally have time to properly answer the questions asked of me.
Guess that would explain the numerous wars between countries all through out history.
So are you saying that if it werent for religion and the populism that brings, there would have been less conflict? I find that a very hard idea to swallow.
Care to provide a link, I can't seem to find one myself on the subject.
Do you really need a link? The ambition of liberal secularism, whilst it has brought ideas of liberty and rationalism to the fore, it has also legitimised the tyranny of the majority and thereby enabled colonisation, genocide etc. I think its pretty telling that the two groups who have committed slaughter on the largest scale in human memory (soviet communism/nazi racialism) did so on a fundamentally secular basis.
Umm.. the parents are typically the ones to teach morals. As a parent I have already instilled a great many morals in my children. I live by my morals, as does my wife, and we expect our children to do so as well. We don't use a book of fantasy characters to teach our children that you need to respect your fellow man, treat people with decency, help those in need, and be kind to animals. These are simple things that everyone should be taught.
I am also a parent, and recently fathered my third child. I do not feel the need to be informed of the obvious point that it is parents who have the greatest effect on the moral development of children. I am merely pointing out the deficiency of secularism to instil many of these morals. Unfortunately for many in society, parents arent always caring or enlightened. Go to any inner city area near you for evidence of this. This is where i think theism comes in. In completely secular societies people feel isolated. All the time we (in britain) are bombarded by images of broken britain. Just today i read a story on how hard drug abuse among 9-11 year olds in Londons poorest areas has reached epidemic levels. 600,000 people live in abject poverty in my home city. Interestingly the number of people who attend churches/mosques/temples is 550,000 most of them black or asian. To say that these people who do not have the good fortune of having affluent, enlightened, responsible parents do not benefit from the comfort of the ritual of religion is simply nonesense.
Furthermore the aspects of religion which i think secularism can learn from are far from the abstract notions of god you describe, but the day to day ritual which fosters communities at all levels within society. Basiclaly carl sagans view: ''A religion, old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science, might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths. Sooner or later, such a religion will emerge''. I say that time is now. I think the secular west has reachedthe epitome of neitzsches idea of 'slavish morality' where selfish individualism and consumption are the dominant virtues.
As far as 'what is our reason for being here' which seems to be what you are addressing here, there is no supernatural reasoning for it.
You misunderstand. The human condition refers not to 'why am i here' but to why humans even feel the need to ask such a question in the first place. The problem with secularism and the liberal theories that accompany it, aswell as the majority of conventional religions, is that they cheat. Life is incredible, horrific, beautiful and obscene. Nearly all religions/philosophies make the same mistake of trying to make sense of what is fundamentally insane. There is definitely a place in a society rife with emotional and social ills, devoid of any consolation trandescent awe or solidarity, concerned solely with financial accumulation, for a new kind of religion. Neither clinging onto old traditions, nor to cast them collectively and belligerently aside, as undoubtedly you and mage would do. Rather, better we take the more relevant aspects, fuse them with insights from art, philosophy and science, and create a church of humanity.
however I can safely say that without religion these men would still have been just as talented as artists and still would have created great and memorable works.
Artists and scientists needed patrons. They may have been talented individuals, but without the money the church had to offer them, they wouldnt have had the financial means to create works of beauty or invention.
Also, you have far too much of a christian bias. Islam provided the scientific and mathematical basis for most of the discoveries of the christian renaissance world. In fact, in order to understand the quran further, things like mathematics and astronomy were encouraged. Religion does not equal christianity.
These are things which humans have constructed out of necessity.
Since the rise of liberal secularism these institutions have been steadily eroded. I am not arguing that without religion they would not have come about, merely that religion is the best device with which to perpetuate them.
Anything which can be found in both humans and in nature can, and rightly should, be applied to us in the same fashion as it is in nature. Humans are animals, and only our egos and our ability for intellectual thought keep us from all admitting and embracing that fact.
I think were straying into the realm of anthropologists and animal experts here. That said, i think you place far too little importance on the intellectual capacity of humans. Despite your labelling of the monkeys as our cousins (genetically true), they are intellectually far inferior. The same standards clearly cannot apply to them. Its like saying newborn children and 24 year old PHD holders should have the same intellectual standards applied to them.
Firstly, this is not a straw man at all. Christianity states that if you do not worship Jesus and follow their dogma that you are going to suffer hell. Islam teaches much the same. And we have zealots on both sides killing eachother still today. This not about the crusades of 800 years ago, this is about what is happening now, in 2010. Religions that teach peace and tolerance are inspiring young and often times educated people to blow themselves up or murder one another. They are inspiring parents to arm their young children, sometimes only 6 or 7 years old, and send them out to kill and die. This is horrific and unfathomable that in the 21st century that such things are still taking place.
Ah, another strawman. Religions foster extremism, therefore religion and religious people are bad. Follows the same logic as 'all women are human, therefore all humans are women'.
This is horrific and unfathomable that in the 21st century that such things are still taking place.
Is it really unfathomable to you why religion is still so prevalent? If so, then your secular crusade is already lost. If you cannot conceive of why people choose to do such extreme things in the name of god(s), then you will never be able to convert the believers.
Also, saying religion causes war is fairly innacurate. Most wars, even in the feudal period were about power and influence, not religion. The mongols didnt conquer the world because of god. They did it because they liked being top dog. As with the romans, alexander the great, the hundred years war etc. In fact, aside from the crusades in the middle east and the ottomans, i cant think of many other large scale conflict which were explicitly based on religion. And again, the wars which have caused the most human suffering have been ideologically secular (ww1-colonies) (ww2-race/colonies).
Often answering the how also answers the why. For example why does the sun appear to move across the sky.
You are thinking about it all wrong, and far too literally. The why is not a concept which applies to every single event within the universe. The why merely represents the human condition.
There is no reason this example wouldn't apply to everything else including the human condition.
Please qualify this. Enlighten me as to how the human condition, as detailed in this post can be explained through your conception of how and why.
