Role of Religions

[ProfessorDavey]

Loyalty arises from a sense of belonging and bonding.

I agree where that is natural and not expected or demanded.

So, of course I feel a natural sense of community and loyalty, to people I actually know - whether friends of family or those living near me that I actually interact with. But that is necessarily a small group and of course one that tends to be rather diverse in terms of religion etc.

But that isn't what we are talking about here - we are talking about forced, unnatural loyalty, where individuals are 'taught' that they should feel more loyal towards a person they've never met, know nothing about simply because they live hundreds of miles away, but also in the UK, while they should have the same sense of loyalty to someone who happens to be French.

Likewise taught that they should feel loyalty to someone thousands of miles away who nominally shares a religion, rather than a person of a different religion (or none) who they might actually have much more in common with.

If loyalty needs to be taught (as is the case for religion, nationalism etc) then it isn't real loyalty - and that is very dangerous. Once you've taught people that they must be loyal to someone they don't know just because they are (for example) muslim, it is an easy step to support them oppressing or persecuting someone else (who you also don't know) of another religion.

[Sriram]

You are still not getting the point.

Without religions....Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism... millions of human beings across the world would not have felt any kinship at all....that we take for granted today. 

Just go back 3000 years and imagine that none of these religions ever existed. How do you think millions of disparate groups of people around the world would have ever developed a bonding? How do you think we would have ever reached today's stage of globalized humanism, kinship and civilized traits?

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2017/02/19/religions-have-suceeded/

[ProfessorDavey]

Without religions....Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism... millions of human beings across the world would not have felt any kinship at all....that we take for granted today.

What rubbish - of course they'd have felt kinship, just on the basis of other aspects of tribalism.

[ippy]

You are still not getting the point.

Without religions....Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism... millions of human beings across the world would not have felt any kinship at all....that we take for granted today. 

Just go back 3000 years and imagine that none of these religions ever existed. How do you think millions of disparate groups of people around the world would have ever developed a bonding? How do you think we would have ever reached today's stage of globalized humanism, kinship and civilized traits?

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2017/02/19/religions-have-suceeded/

I wonder what came first kinship or religion? I doubt religion, it's pretty obvious thunder etc., was explained as the man in the sky's anger, just as a way of trying to make sense of the world, the kinship was there a necessary assist to survival as a group, I'm all for the kinship bit but isn't it about time the Mr Magic Man in the Sky bit was consigned to history where it belongs, more urgently so from India than a lot of other places.

I knew that there seems to be a lot religion based riots in India reported in our media from time to time but I hadn't realised how many or how frequent they were, until I had a dip into Google Sriram, surprisingly to me you seem to have religion based riots going on in differing parts of your country for most of the time and most of them involve deaths usually well into double figures, so much for religion bringing kinsmanship, is this summery another one that's missing your elusive point or has Google got it wrong?

Regards ippy.

[ProfessorDavey]

How do you think we would have ever reached today's stage of globalized humanism, kinship and civilized traits?

Actually there is a strong relationship between societies that were less dominated by religion and the development of civilised traits. Down the centuries the development of highly theocratic societies is typically associated with the stifling of civilising traits.

We don't talk about the dark ages and the enlightenment for nothing. We don't see the Greek and Roman cultures (that were highly secularised) as paragons of early culture for nothing. We don't see the most civilised and democratic societies that have the greatest social provision (e.g. Scandinavian countries) which are some of the least religious countries on the planet (through choice) for no reason.

[Sriram]

Ok...thanks guys!  Cheers.

[SusanDoris]

I was denied information about any aspect of atheism when I was  young. That was the way things were, but  oh, how much sooner I would have been an atheist if it had not been so denied. Ah, well.

[ippy]

Sriram hasn't got the arguments he wants to hear or wants; over and out!

See you next time Sriram, when's the next edition of your science magazine due out?

Regards ippy.

[Robbie]

I'm not sure you're right about that, sririam will process the information he gets from us (none from me on this occasion) and try to understand but what he is trying to convey is difficult to comprehend. I think, having read it all a few times, I've got his meaning. It would be easier if he was with us and drawing diagrams on a white board or moving groups of figures around on a table.

[ippy]

I'm not sure you're right about that, sririam will process the information he gets from us (none from me on this occasion) and try to understand but what he is trying to convey is difficult to comprehend. I think, having read it all a few times, I've got his meaning. It would be easier if he was with us and drawing diagrams on a white board or moving groups of figures around on a table.

I am sure Rob.

Regards ippy.

[torridon]

You are still not getting the point.

Without religions....Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism... millions of human beings across the world would not have felt any kinship at all....that we take for granted today..... 

Is it a good thing that a muslim in Bangladesh feels kinship with a muslim in Malaysia because they share the same belief system ?  I don't think we can say that is a good thing, it is a zero sum game as the gain (kinship) is counter balanced by the loss, the undue lack of kinship with people who follow different paths. If we identify as fundamentally different, we create division and separation which becomes fault lines for conflict. We can see this today with the Rohingya and the Buddhists in Myanmar and many other places and loyalty is a factor in all these situations.  If people were loyal to their humanity rather than their particular religion or cultural group then the world would be a kinder gentler place.

[ProfessorDavey]

If people were loyal to their humanity rather than their particular religion or cultural group then the world would be a kinder gentler place.

Well said.

[Sriram]

I'm not sure you're right about that, sririam will process the information he gets from us (none from me on this occasion) and try to understand but what he is trying to convey is difficult to comprehend. I think, having read it all a few times, I've got his meaning. It would be easier if he was with us and drawing diagrams on a white board or moving groups of figures around on a table.

Hi Robbie

Request you to read the link I have provided in the OP. That is a little more elaborate and might convey what I have to say.

Simply put....we have evolved from animals and had/have all their survival instincts, mutual suspicions, fears and violent  behavior.  Thousands of years ago people living in remote villages were separated by great distances. Besides that, there were racial, linguistic, cultural differences which created a bigger gap.

Under these circumstances unifying people of such disparate groups world over and inculcating non violence, universal brotherhood, love, altruism and so on would have been impossible.   

This impossible feat was achieved by religions. They created a sense of kinship, a common universal Father, common rules and laws, common goal.  This task was done by different religions in different regions and they created like minded groups far removed from the local villages and communities.

People across large geographical areas, who had never met one another, felt a bond and a common goal. This is not as simple as we might today think. It is a great achievement.

Today the number of common groups has been reduced to largely four major religions. This is a fantastic achievement considering how divided the world was say, thousand years ago.  No doubt, there are still minor skirmishes between religions and within religions. This is of no consequence. The important thing is the sense of belonging that people feel towards their religions.

Our present day humanism, global outlook, mutual respect etc. that we take for granted, have been possible only because of religions. 

Cheers.

Sriram

[trippymonkey]

Mutual respect??? In Islam??

Have you never read the Quran or the Hadiths, the 'sayings' of the 'prophet'?
Though what he prophecied, I've no idea. Nor did he EVER 'talk' directly with ANY god at all. Wonder why Muslims have never questioned THAT one.?!?!?

I have & talked with loads of Muslims over the years. Sunni - Shia etc !!! MMM Group cohesion???

Sorry about the 'rant' !!! That's my 5 rupees worth for today !!! Honest !!!
Nick

[SusanDoris]

Well said.

Agreed.

If only, if only , ah, if only the original first sceptics - and there must have been some right from the beginning of the superstitions that must have led to beliefs in god, had been able to enforce their message more strongly, more widely, more sensibly, more charismatically,. etc then we wouldn't be where we are today!

[SteveH]

You are still not getting the point.

Without religions....Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism... millions of human beings across the world would not have felt any kinship at all....that we take for granted today. 

Just go back 3000 years and imagine that none of these religions ever existed. How do you think millions of disparate groups of people around the world would have ever developed a bonding? How do you think we would have ever reached today's stage of globalized humanism, kinship and civilized traits?

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2017/02/19/religions-have-suceeded/

None of which is evidence for any religion being true.

[ProfessorDavey]

This impossible feat was achieved by religions. They created a sense of kinship, a common universal Father, common rules and laws, common goal.

So clearly wasn't impossible. Nor unique to religion.

The same (with the exception of 'common universal father, whatever that means - isn't even universal for all religions) has been achieved by pandering to a common sense of ethnicity, nationalism and political/societal standpoint.

[Rhiannon]

The Abrahamic faiths with their 'universal father' have been spectacularly good at slaughtering each other over him.

[wigginhall]

Yeah, but think of the sense of kinship that the slaughterers felt towards each other.   Killing brings us together.

[Nearly Sane]

Yeah, but think of the sense of kinship that the slaughterers felt towards each other.   Killing brings us together.

The religion that slays together, stays together

[Maeght]

Simply put....we have evolved from animals and had/have all their survival instincts, mutual suspicions, fears and violent  behavior.

We are animals too.

[Enki]

Sriram,

I think your views are far too simplistic. You simply seem to concentrate on one thing, religion, which, of itself, can be a particularly divisive product, and then seek to suggest that its unifying force is illustrated by the fact that four major religions became the dominant forces. I would suggest that, in contrast to this, such things as increasing trade between countries and communities, urbanization, increasing democratization, the influence of the 'enlightenment' period on humanistic thinking, greater communication, and the means of communication, have all had their important parts to play here. And, of course, even with religion, there are many disparate groups within them which has led, and continues to lead to conflict. In other words, for every unifying aspect of these dominant religions(although I'm not sure that Buddhism really counts), there is a darker, more divisive side which can be seen to have its influence on many of the conflicts of today.

[Sriram]

I know that there has been a wave of anti religion sentiment for the past few decades. A normal process of reform, as I see it.

That is however no reason why you people should get so carried away by the trend that you get all blinkered.

If all of you see religions only as 'slaying people'...well...what can I say!!

Cheers.

Sriram

[SusanDoris]

Religions put forward as true facts totally unevidenced - i.e. the objective, verifiable, etc sort -  falsehoods, and nowadays, with the vast range of actual facts we have available, I see no valid excuse for this.

[ProfessorDavey]

... you people should get so carried away by the trend that you get all blinkered.

I don't think it is us that are blinkered Siriam.