Silence8 -> RE: Religion and me (3/25/2010 10:28:49 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Termyn8or eyes, I had no intention to mess with anyone's faith or put anyone down. If you have real faith noone can tear it down anyway. The religious types who irk me are the hypocrites, those who do dastardly deeds all week and think they can go to church and all is forgiven. Or perhaps they go for show. I made no such accusation here, just to be clear. Since I have no faith in the conventional sense I am in the dark as to how one gains real faith. One's religious education might start at a very impressionable age. But does that actually gain them faith, or simply indoctrinate them ? Does true faith maybe come later, after introspection or some event ? I mean when you are young and they start teaching you about Moses, apple trees and all that, I don't think that instills faith, but it may open the door so to speak. And is there such a thing as too much faith ? My ex-boss, a good guy really but a bit wierd. He attributes his success in business to God. He got an idea years ago and made a bunch of money, and thanks God for telling him what to do. I think that's going a bit too far. I also think that if one externalizes their success, they can then externalize their failure. That doesn't work for me at all. Actually I don't think that my aversion is to faith itself, but to the construct of religion in general. Becoming a part of something over which I have no control. For example I am much more comfortable in the driver's seat if we are to race around at 100+ MPH like I used to. I never used to loan out that car as it was a menace to society, and I rarely if ever let anyone even drive it. I don't like others having that kind of control over my destiny. A phobia is an irrational fear, so since I have chosen not to have faith the question is why ? I reject authority and structure, are those so closely related to faith ? What is it about this whole thing that made me avoid it like the plague ? Believe it or not I actually do believe there is a God, but I don't think he talks much. And my concept differs greatly from any known religion. I am not quite sure if that qualifies me as an atheist or not. If God talks He probably does it with actions, but that in no way is meant to construe that I fall in with those crazoids who believe for example, that Katrina was God's punishment for letting Gays in the military. If God is truly omnipotent and wants to micromanage the world, He could just give heart attacks to the "right" people. All in all, there are of course more questions than answers. What turned me off to this ? I swear it was like a phobia. But a rational phobia is not a phobia, so was it or not ? T These are good points. I second the objection to religious hypocrisy, though you could argue that these types, without religion, would find somewhere else to place this hypocrisy and its accompanying sense of superiority, e.g., science, 'health' (think of the secondhand smoke psychopaths), organic foods, etc. But, yeah, unfortunately religious's continued prevalence owes mostly to psychology, and in a very ambiguous (not-so-great) way. Faith in-and-of-itself is an extremely ambiguous construct. My theory is that non-faith is an impossible position -- everyone has faith in something at least insofar as their everyday lives imply a whole complicated set of logical and epistemological constructs. So what 'the faithful' do is take the ordinary, give it a name, and then use it to divide themselves from 'the other'. The word that Veblen would use would be 'invidious'. Faith, religion, and cultural more generally all possess strong invidious tendencies. Generally, I find that religious morality usually overlies some more profound immorality. In this sense Dostoevsky was exactly wrong -- with (a symbiotic) God, everything is permitted.
|
|
|
|