Asklemmy

43945 readers

638 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

266

Why in 2024 do people still believe in religion? (serious) (lemmy.world)

submitted 5 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

434 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ianovic69@feddit.uk -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well, thank you for that.

However, I'm not making an assumption. I'm merely pointing out that if religion isn't necessary for the implied benefits, then why use that method? The fact is that no one uses blind faith as the basis for anything else important to them.

I don't have a strongly held belief regarding the existence of any gods. When presented with the assertion that they do exist, the lack of good evidence means that I remain unconvinced. I'm open to good evidence.

In the case of manipulation, as you call it, religious indoctrination from birth by family, community and peers is well documented. I'm surprised you're not aware of this.

As for the assessment of benefits, there's a great deal of research into what people do with their lives and why. We know a lot about these motivations and there are clear lines to known conclusions. It's largely psychology.

There is nothing to suggest we need religion for any of the benefits that religious people say they obtain from it, or that they demonstrate through their actions.

I hope this makes things clear but feel free to ask if not.

[–] sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't have a strongly held belief regarding the existence of any gods.

The strongly held belief I'm referring to isn't a belief in a god or lack thereof, its a belief that religion is a net negative for society.

I'm surprised you're not aware of this.

To say I'm not aware of this is again to argue in bad faith. I have mentioned myself that religious indoctrination of course still exists, and is a problem.

As for the assessment of benefits, there's a great deal of research into what people do with their lives and why.

Yes there is research into how religion affects society, but it isn't very useful for this purpose for multiple reasons. There is no instance of a society without religion, so the difference between a religious and non-religious society can't be studied. There can be no consensus on what is beneficial and what isn't, as morality itself isn't objective.

There is not and there never will be definitive evidence as to whether or not religion is beneficial for society.

There is nothing to suggest we need religion for any of the benefits that religious people say they obtain from it,

There is also nothing to suggest the opposite, because this can't really be determined. You would have to so create a set of all the benefits religious people claim to get, which in and of itself would be a monumental task. Then, you would have to demonstrate that nonreligious people can achieve all of the exact same benefits.

This is why I've come to the conclusion that this argument is pointless, and neither of us know anything beyond our personal experience.

[–] ianovic69@feddit.uk 1 points 5 months ago

its a belief that religion is a net negative for society.

Ok but you are ascribing this to my making of an assumption, which I am not.

I have mentioned myself that religious indoctrination of course still exists

And yet you asked for evidence and method, for which there is an awful lot. Which leads me to -

There is no instance of a society without religion

We aren't talking about whole societies, just individuals. This can be studied very effectively.

There can be no consensus on what is beneficial and what isn't, as morality itself isn't objective.

We aren't talking about consensus, again it's only individuals, which can be effectively studied.

These benefits are those claimed by the religious themselves, not whole societies.

You would have to so create a set of all the benefits religious people claim to get, which in and of itself would be a monumental task.

As I've said, we've been doing this for a long time and have vast data from many people. Social activity and personal motivation are well studied and include the religious.

Then, you would have to demonstrate that nonreligious people can achieve all of the exact same benefits.

Again, this is well studied with mountains of good evidence. It's what I meant when I said I'm surprised you're not aware of it.

You're welcome to your view, but I disagree. Don't feel you need to continue, but I'm happy to if you want.