- 1,695
I have set a poll at the top, but that is not the basis of the thread.
I was raised in Canada, and from what I can tell, Canada has WAY more "non-religious" people than most places, especially the USA. However, onto the discussion. I urge you to read what I've said. I think you will find it woth while, I dont think I am rambling. However........
I saw a commercial today, paid for by the Church of Christ or a christian organization. In summation, one roomate had ripped apart the wall by the light switch. His roomate walked in and got mad about the ruined wall. In his defence, the first roomate said, "I was trying to see how it works". Then the friend says in a condescending tone, "Why do you have to know how it works, all you need to know is that it works". Of course this is an analogy for accepting religion for what it is or trying to decide for yourself. Is this commercial not promoting blatant ignorance?
I am reading the George Orwell book "1984" which was written in 1948 about a society set in 1984 that is completely regimented and controlled by the government. One of their slogans is "Ignorance is Strength". Meaning, that ignorance of the people is strength for the country. Basically, they are saying, don't think about why you have to obey us, and follow our every command, if you do question this, the government will fall apart. A perfect analogy of any major religion.
What I am asking is: Does religion require us to shutdown the inquisitive, curious and knowledge seeking part of ourselves, which is actually the hallmark of the human race. Hallmark meaning the main trait which separates us from other animals. We have an insatiable thirst for knowledge which has subsequently spawned all of the technology and medicine and everything else that has essentially positioned us at the top of the food chain for lack of a better term.
Humans have always had to investigate and understand their surroundings. I believe this is what spawned religion in the first place. People ask themselves "Why is the sky blue?", "Why are we here?" etc. Basically every culture has come up with an explaination from Greek Mythology to Christianity. So, they naturally came up with some sort of reason why we are here. And most cultures came up with pretty basic reasoning. "uh, there is a higher being which just put it all here" or "It's a test". To digress, I also believe that, with the onset of civilization, and the overall separation of the human "pack" into just the family unit, most humans felt a need for a "leader" to be answerable to. We are not all naturally dominant and capable of taking responsibility, this variation of character from person to person was crucial in developing a pack-like hierarchy when we first evolved as group animals. So far it seems quite understandable why religion came about and was so popular.
St. Thomas Aquinus came up with 5 main reasons why God exists. To be honest, I only know the second one. He said, everything must have a cause. This seems to have some initial appeal. Because when we look around us, everything does seem to have a cause. The cat eats the spider which eats the fly etc. So he protests that the universe is here, seemingly without a cause, so given that nothing can just pop into existence without a cause, he goes on to say that God must have created it. Of course this reasoning has a flaw. Who created God. If everything must have a cause, why did God come into existence? Following the initial reasoning, you'd have to say that another God in turn created God. And if you followed this reasoning you would end up with an infinite number of Gods that all created each other. St. Thomas Equinas' counter-argument was that God was the exception to this rule. But then ask yourself, why can't the universe be the exception? Why bring in this intangible un-provable entity into the picture? It is unnecessary to have this addition to the chain of causes.
An analogy of this involves an ancient East Indian way of explaing why the Earth did not fall. Or what is holding the Earth up. All they knew back then was that things fall down, so why not the dirt below us? Well, they decided that the world sat on the back of a Giant Tortoise. But it didnt take long for someone to ask, what is holding the tortoise up? Then they decided that the tortoise was standing on the back of a giant elephant. This belief is no longer around for the main reason that we now have proof that the world is round, which is a good thing or I suppose people would still believe we were on top of a tortoise and an elephant. But, the reasoning for the tortoise and the elephant is elementally wrong. If you followed the reasoning any further you would have an infinite stack of animals forming some giant totem pole that never ends.
So, if you are religious and you had the courage to read my thoughts knowing that it could undercut your beliefs I think you deserve a pat on the back. Because whether or not you believe what I've said, you are not choosing ignorance which your religion is basically asking of you.
To everyone else, I thank you immeasurably for reading my thoughts and point of view. I know it takes alot of patience to read.
Now, I want you guys to convince me that I am wrong, and that my reasoning is flawed. or some of you might agree with what I have said. Either way, I want your opinions and insights into the question that mankind will never stop asking.
I was raised in Canada, and from what I can tell, Canada has WAY more "non-religious" people than most places, especially the USA. However, onto the discussion. I urge you to read what I've said. I think you will find it woth while, I dont think I am rambling. However........
I saw a commercial today, paid for by the Church of Christ or a christian organization. In summation, one roomate had ripped apart the wall by the light switch. His roomate walked in and got mad about the ruined wall. In his defence, the first roomate said, "I was trying to see how it works". Then the friend says in a condescending tone, "Why do you have to know how it works, all you need to know is that it works". Of course this is an analogy for accepting religion for what it is or trying to decide for yourself. Is this commercial not promoting blatant ignorance?
I am reading the George Orwell book "1984" which was written in 1948 about a society set in 1984 that is completely regimented and controlled by the government. One of their slogans is "Ignorance is Strength". Meaning, that ignorance of the people is strength for the country. Basically, they are saying, don't think about why you have to obey us, and follow our every command, if you do question this, the government will fall apart. A perfect analogy of any major religion.
What I am asking is: Does religion require us to shutdown the inquisitive, curious and knowledge seeking part of ourselves, which is actually the hallmark of the human race. Hallmark meaning the main trait which separates us from other animals. We have an insatiable thirst for knowledge which has subsequently spawned all of the technology and medicine and everything else that has essentially positioned us at the top of the food chain for lack of a better term.
Humans have always had to investigate and understand their surroundings. I believe this is what spawned religion in the first place. People ask themselves "Why is the sky blue?", "Why are we here?" etc. Basically every culture has come up with an explaination from Greek Mythology to Christianity. So, they naturally came up with some sort of reason why we are here. And most cultures came up with pretty basic reasoning. "uh, there is a higher being which just put it all here" or "It's a test". To digress, I also believe that, with the onset of civilization, and the overall separation of the human "pack" into just the family unit, most humans felt a need for a "leader" to be answerable to. We are not all naturally dominant and capable of taking responsibility, this variation of character from person to person was crucial in developing a pack-like hierarchy when we first evolved as group animals. So far it seems quite understandable why religion came about and was so popular.
St. Thomas Aquinus came up with 5 main reasons why God exists. To be honest, I only know the second one. He said, everything must have a cause. This seems to have some initial appeal. Because when we look around us, everything does seem to have a cause. The cat eats the spider which eats the fly etc. So he protests that the universe is here, seemingly without a cause, so given that nothing can just pop into existence without a cause, he goes on to say that God must have created it. Of course this reasoning has a flaw. Who created God. If everything must have a cause, why did God come into existence? Following the initial reasoning, you'd have to say that another God in turn created God. And if you followed this reasoning you would end up with an infinite number of Gods that all created each other. St. Thomas Equinas' counter-argument was that God was the exception to this rule. But then ask yourself, why can't the universe be the exception? Why bring in this intangible un-provable entity into the picture? It is unnecessary to have this addition to the chain of causes.
An analogy of this involves an ancient East Indian way of explaing why the Earth did not fall. Or what is holding the Earth up. All they knew back then was that things fall down, so why not the dirt below us? Well, they decided that the world sat on the back of a Giant Tortoise. But it didnt take long for someone to ask, what is holding the tortoise up? Then they decided that the tortoise was standing on the back of a giant elephant. This belief is no longer around for the main reason that we now have proof that the world is round, which is a good thing or I suppose people would still believe we were on top of a tortoise and an elephant. But, the reasoning for the tortoise and the elephant is elementally wrong. If you followed the reasoning any further you would have an infinite stack of animals forming some giant totem pole that never ends.
So, if you are religious and you had the courage to read my thoughts knowing that it could undercut your beliefs I think you deserve a pat on the back. Because whether or not you believe what I've said, you are not choosing ignorance which your religion is basically asking of you.
To everyone else, I thank you immeasurably for reading my thoughts and point of view. I know it takes alot of patience to read.
Now, I want you guys to convince me that I am wrong, and that my reasoning is flawed. or some of you might agree with what I have said. Either way, I want your opinions and insights into the question that mankind will never stop asking.
Last edited:
