/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3369248]

Why Does Religion Exist?

[Anonymous No.3369258]

i'm guessing it has to deal with this whole WHY thing. whatever the fuck that is.

[Anonymous No.3369273]

Wrong picture dude
very wrong picture

[Anonymous No.3369281]

>>3369248
Do satisfy humanity's need for security. As religion declines, the omniscience of the police state will grow.

You will see no third path.

[Anonymous No.3369278]

to explain things we didnt understand. then traditions were passed down culturally.

[Anonymous No.3369285]

>>3369273
i dunno, to op it may be...RELATIVE PAHAHAHAH

[Anonymous No.3369296]

Because anxiety sucks.

[Anonymous No.3369304]

>>3369285
Einstein wans't atheist
“The fanatical atheists…are creatures who cannot hear the music of the spheres. I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist. What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos.”

[Anonymous No.3369311]

>>3369304

He didn't say pic related. Stop being so defensive you cock gnarling christfag.

[Anonymous No.3369316]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iMmvu9eMrg

also because its a beautiful idea. and it comforts people in their suffering.

[Anonymous No.3369322]

>answers from a bunch of butt hurt atheististic faggots

Uh, I mean, its because religious people are all really retarded and needs teddy bears to cry to. You know... not like I need that.

[Anonymous No.3369330]

>>3369322

The only butthurt replies in this thread were from theists. Examples:
>>3369273
>>3369304
And your own post, of course.

Sage for not science.

[Anonymous No.3369337]

>>3369248
ITT: people don't understand that evolution has provided a need for security that is provided by relgion. Without religion, this security would be provided by a police state.

[Anonymous No.3369345]

>>3369330

How the fuck do you know if they were theists? How the fuck do you know I am a theist?

This is another example of why atheists are a bunch of faggots. The presumptions. As if the only people who could have the slightest criticism against an atheistic thread MUST believe in god and are offended.

[Anonymous No.3369350]

>>3369304
who said anything about atheism? crickets?

[Anonymous No.3369355]

>>3369345
Hypocrite. You assumed I was an atheist.

The only difference is that my post isn't followed by a retarded strawman.

[Anonymous No.3369360]

>>3369337

Where evolution provides security, apart from "here do we come from" which people don't care that much about. It doesn't offers a promise of eternal life or a meaning to your life.
Neither does police state.

[Anonymous No.3369364]

>>3369355

[Anonymous No.3369383]

>>3369355

You got me, I was being hypocritical. Are you an atheist though? I would say I am.

I dont think religion provides the security we always point out. Thats really condescending in my opinion. It implies religious people have some deficiency us intellectuals have overcome.

[Anonymous No.3369388]

>>3369360
No, evolution and the construct of society are closely mediated by religiosity and the structured belief provided by religion. Without religion within evolution, tribes of proto-humans would have never been able to increase the density of their societies because past around 150 people, humans are incapable of knowing other individuals.

Thus, religion provides a conduit for security, a short hand, to identify friend and language. This language, whether it's from rituals, body/clothing and moral beliefs, allows people to trust one another. If it was not that way, then religion would not be the most populous of meme-types.

In the end, if you remove religion and replace it with atheism, which has no codex (save the stupidity of dawkins), then you invariably must provide for the security provided by religion. You don't have to look any further than Britain where atheism is on the rise to see the start of the omniscient police state.

It's ludicrous not to see how religion provides for the security of densely populated societies.

[Anonymous No.3369391]

>>3369383
No, it just implies that it's just what we seen, what we went through, all of that related to our personality made that one day we became atheist when we realised something.

[Anonymous No.3369397]

>>3369383
We're on antidepressants. I know I am.

[Anonymous No.3369401]

>>3369391

Well what if, the difference between, my attitude as an atheist, and my great great great great great great great grand father's attitude as a theist wasnt much different. Its just in the intervening years people have misunderstood their own religion. And now in hindsight everyone looks like some stupid backwards moron, because we cant understand the context in which religious language was used?

[Anonymous No.3369405]

>>3369388
What do you say about the greeks and romans who were atheists but had fake myths they knew were myths but kept around because they were good stories of literary value?

[Anonymous No.3369414]

>>3369388
>implying other social bonds don't exist

fucking retard

[Anonymous No.3369427]

>>3369405

>What do you say about the greeks and romans who were atheists but had fake myths they knew were myths but kept around because they were good stories of literary value?
>greeks and romans who were atheists
>fake myths
>literary value

[Anonymous No.3369428]

>>3369414
Ok, what bonds do you speak about that can keep a single person's psychology beneath the 150 people threshhold feel safe?

As in, what bond or instrument is capable of providing for a single person's mental security when surrounded by more than 150 people, which they are incapable of knowing personally.

[Anonymous No.3369432]

>>3369350
>Atheist
>Using one of God's creatures in an argument
Oh, this is too easy.

[Anonymous No.3369437]

>>3369414

I agree.

>>3369405

This is a really good point. I think religion is just a joke some people arent in on. As people become more and more obedient to their own religion and closeminded to the other religions humanity gets closer to the breaking point. With each teenager conversation to atheism is like another little statement of "jk"

[Anonymous No.3369438]

>>3369427
>implying greek and roman literature isn't demigod tier
it's inherent in our language too. the guy who was so in love with himself he drowned because he saw his reflection in water?

[Anonymous No.3369443]

>>3369428
it's called culture, you share cultural practices; religion is one of these.

[Anonymous No.3369449]

>>3369427
>implying religion doesn't use parables in a similar way

[Anonymous No.3369455]

>>3369443
Ok, what cultural practices are distinct enough to not be folded into religion?

Embiggening the category isn't going to make the argument diluted. You can't just wave some mystical wand called culture.

[Anonymous No.3369462]

>>3369455

All your questions are so loaded!

Why would a cultural practice have to be distinct enough to not "fold into religion"?

[Anonymous No.3369464]

>>3369449

wat

[Anonymous No.3369467]

>>3369462
Because you're not refuting anything by saying 'herr, religion is a part of culture'.

The original argument, is that religion provides security. The method in which this can be proven is to extrapolate that as religiosity decreases, the police state increase.

now, stay on point.

[Anonymous No.3369469]

>>3369455

Why do you hate America?

[Anonymous No.3369471]

>>3369455
>Ok, what cultural practices are distinct enough to not be folded into religion?
language

[Anonymous No.3369476]

>>3369471
Eh? who do you think provided the majority of context for languages?

[Anonymous No.3369487]

>>3369467
>>3369462
>>3369455

False Dilemma.

Now take your Sophism elsewhere.

[Anonymous No.3369493]

>>3369467

I think its refuting something. You are saying we need religion in order to live in larger societies, specifically over 150 people (why that number is important Ill never know). I am assuming its because religion creates a common glue that spreads through people and creates a common glue, or set of beliefs, or language, or values, or whatever.

There are lots of ways to establish common whatever. There are just tons of way and tons of opportunities in which people can gel well together. Im sure people had a lot in common. And even if they didnt, maybe thats an opportunity to get along with people. Maybe it was the fact that people realized their neighbors had a different kind of life that made our societies grow. But whatever, Im just musing.

You dont have a point. You are just saying that religion is security. And my reaction is like "Eh... MAYBE..." and then you make this statement about police states, which goes completely unsubstaniated. The UK is a police state? Whatever. Give me some clear definitions.

[Anonymous No.3369494]

>>3369467
well that's a retarded argument, being that religion is a cultural practice for one.
secondly security comes through other means of cultural practices that make sure you become socialized. In belonging you form a people, when these social bonds break down we see instability. Described by some as 'anomie'.
Also you have even failed to define exactly what you mean by secuirty; secuirty against what? other peoples? each other?
all society would have some punishment for murder, regardless of religion, since if murder were a cultural norm then society would cease to function.

[Anonymous No.3369498]

>>3369487

If you are calling samefag, then you are wrong. I was a differentfag.

[Anonymous No.3369507]

>>3369248
because it is a stage in the the evolution of the human spirit

[Anonymous No.3369501]

>>3369467

>The method in which this can be proven is to extrapolate that as religiosity decreases, the police state increase.

That's simply incorrect. Western and Northern Europe contains some of the freest countries in the world while also having the lowest levels of religiosity.

[Anonymous No.3369509]

>>3369493
Dunbar's number:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number

[Anonymous No.3369514]

because is a disease

[Anonymous No.3369515]

>>3369509

Thank you

[Anonymous No.3369521]

>>3369498

>If you are calling samefag

wat?

Provide link in which there is any mention of a word "samefag".
I merely helped one of the posters by giving him a name for what he was thinking and ruined the lisa-tard.

Whoever you are i will call you an idiot.

[Anonymous No.3369527]

>>3369493
religion provides security because it is a codex of beliefs that allows one to model any random human being's existence, as long as they extoll their religion.

The problem, is people, particularly rich, white, atheists, tend to have a problem with anything that provides a imaginary cohesion to the world around them.

In other words, they think, that because they find god and religion to be irrational, that religion itself is irrational.

They tend to discount and ignore that religion is a very psychologically dependent framework for maslow's hierarchy of needs, and without it, something has to provide a basic pattern for knowing that the guy next to you is in anyway similar to you.

I'm not sure why this apparently is so complicated, except being that people hate religion.

[Anonymous No.3369529]

>>3369521

I didnt know if you were saying I was a samefag. I wasnt sure so I said "If you are" to allow the possibility that you werent.

[Anonymous No.3369531]

>>3369494
security: the knowledge that you are safe and will continue to be safe.

[Anonymous No.3369532]

>>3369527
I like you

[Anonymous No.3369534]

>>3369527

Thank you. This is very clear and makes sense.

[Anonymous No.3369540]

>>3369501
Huh?

Did you even look at london? Or our holy war against muslims in america?

I think you're neglecting that anti-religion is both a police state problem (atheists) and a christianity problem (theists).

[Anonymous No.3369549]

Why is police state even a discussion point here?

If I was living in the UK I would be troubled by CCTVs, but I dont think that has anything to do with religion. I also dont think "Sometimes people dont like Muslims" qualifies any country as a police state.

[Anonymous No.3369552]

>>3369527

>The problem, is people, particularly rich, white, atheists, tend to have a problem with anything that provides a imaginary cohesion to the world around them.

>particularly
>white

Be a little more "particular".
Are you referring to Caucasians?
And if you are, do you refer to all its divisions, or particularly Aryans/Hamitic/Semitic.

[Anonymous No.3369554]

>>3369531
well then that comes down to social bonds, society provides that secuirty and familiarity; you share not only language but all of your customs, the way you dress and even leisure activity.
The nation-state tries to provide a greater cultural context for you to position yourself also, but it is no guarentor of security; infact you will find most people feel very UNSAFE in a police state- save those whom benefit.
Social convention and culture provide your security, beyond the small band or community you live within, thus (as i explained) anomie is the state in which people tend to lash out.

[Anonymous No.3369559]

>>3369540

>Western and Northern Europe
>Or our holy war against muslims in america

wat

[Anonymous No.3369560]

>>3369549
Because It's the government's omniscience that is currently provided by religion.

[Anonymous No.3369567]

>>3369560

Is there a correlation? Lets just make a list of countries and we will see how many of the less religious ones are brutal police states, and how many religious ones arent.

[Anonymous No.3369569]

>>3369552
Well, i've met some rich asians who arn't atheists. And theres a general correlation between being rich and being atheist.

So you know. People.

[Anonymous No.3369572]

>>3369549
This, it has nothing to do with it. Just someone being a gigantic faggot and desperatly trying to push the idea that the anthesis to a religious society is a 'police state'.
Totally ignoring the numerous social bonds one has within their life to a wider community; admittadly these bondshave been loosen, but by wholly economic imperatives.
Take for example the working class communities of northern England or even the poor suburbs of France; the former being the connection of a class bond that provided your security and the latter, well, the French police don't very much like going into those places.

[Anonymous No.3369575]

>>3369554
Again, dunbar's number gets in the way of societal bonds. After 150 people, you need a superstructure to find security.

Whether it is religion or a police state, it doesn't matter to the argument.

I posit a very testable hypothesis. I'm unsure why no one can directly refute it.

[Anonymous No.3369588]

>>3369540
secularism=/=anti-religiousity

the two are not, neccessarily, related.
This is the kind of argumens you get when people take all their ideas on society from an anthropologist- those who do not attempt to understand a lived reality

[Anonymous No.3369589]

>>3369575

Is there any proof for Dunbar's number? I now understand what it means. After a certain amount of people, one individual cant have social contact with all of society. I just dont see how that matters.

[Anonymous No.3369598]

>>3369572
Name the bonds then, these awesome, better than fucking religion bonds. Is it government? Surely it must be something, if you're so hard up to kill religion as a thankless red headed stepchild.

[Anonymous No.3369607]

>>3369588
Oh you're right. Atheists and theists can both hate the same theist for difference reason.

The original point which still stands, is that if religion declines, the police state will rise.

[Anonymous No.3369611]

>>3369575
you're clearly an idiot, the opposite of religion is not a police state- or even a state.
Whether or not you are able to gain familiarity with 150 people or not, one feels connected through social bonds to, varying, larger groups.
I would likeyou to attend a football match in Europe and you may understand this concept.
Again, you are focusing too much on an examination that does not take into account lived realities.

[Anonymous No.3369612]

Religion exists as a reaction to the incompleteness or inadequacy of simpler, less developed forms of cognition, such as science.

[Anonymous No.3369620]

>>3369589
Proof on the value, or proof that you can't remember the needs and wants of more than 150 people?

[Anonymous No.3369621]

>>3369607

The point doesnt stand. You just said some shit that needs substantiating.

[Anonymous No.3369626]

>>3369620

The latter.

[Anonymous No.3369627]

>>3369611
Eh?

Lived realities, you mean the reality that you're currently buffered by religion?

I'm talking from a point where I accept what religion provides for society. You talk as if you're living or have any idea what no religion means.

[Anonymous No.3369628]

>>3369598
god damn, why are social bonds so difficult to understand?
http://documentarystorm.com/the-human-animal/

i will let a more able anthropologist than Dunbar explain instead

[Anonymous No.3369637]

>>3369627
a lived reality; or rather than engaging on a study of people from an outsiders perspective actually examing their world view.
You have some cognitive issues my friend;
you simply assert that 'no religion=police state', some how this is an infallable statement?
Im not surprised you don't understand the concept of broader social bonds, beyond religion, you clearly have no friends.

[Anonymous No.3369639]

>>3369628
Because again, they break down at unimaginable population density. We're talking about cohabitation in 1 million population centres all around the world.

This is very simple, you are going to either have a cohesive religion or a surveillance police state. Of course, it's going to be a mixture, but it's clear that being atheist doesn't preclude you from still requiring the necessities of religion.

[Anonymous No.3369645]

Astrological patterns. Watch the movie "Zeitgeist", it explains how the "sun gods" were made up.

[Anonymous No.3369657]

>>3369639
oh OH i see what you've done, you've literally expanded religion to encompass all and everything in society.
Well if we're just gonna make shit up that's fine. Either that or you've gravely misunderstood Foucault