country and religion

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by ethernos, Sep 8, 2017.

  1. ethernos Registered Member

    Messages:
    87
    if common enemy doesn't work.....how do we unite the world....turning our back on religion and country may not solve everything .,,,,
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. ForrestDean Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    291
    Considering the mindset, lifestyle, priorities, values, and overwhelming binding beliefs of today's society it would appear on the surface that a global unification is nowhere near in site. At this point, based on continuous observation, I cannot see any other way to alter the current self-destructive path of the global society than that of an extraordinary event taking place.
     
    ethernos likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,959
    A hydrogen bomb isn't "inherently" dangerous either. It's only dangerous if some nut sets it off.
     
    ethernos likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,606
    From Kx000 Post 13
    While I do not have much respect for politicians, religious folks often seem to be fanatics who want to impose their views on others, while politicians are only trying to convince folks to vote for them.

    It seems difficult to imagine a culture or government without individuals similar to or very much like politicians. Anarchy does not seem like a workable basis for a culture.

    I can readily imagine a culture/government without religion.
     
  8. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,659
    Do we really want to 'unite the world'?

    It seems to me that there really are different cultures, different ways of conceptualizing things and different goals and purposes. As humanity moves into an unknowable future, it experiences cultural evolution analogous to biological evolution. Somehow pushing/forcing everyone into adopting some homogeneous unity doesn't seem to me to be the best future for the planet. I favor the cultural equivalent of biodiversity. Human history is an ongoing experiment and we don't really know what's going to work out best (or even what the word 'best' means in actual cases).

    I'm more a believer in cultural diversity, where different visions and traditions are able to coexist. ('Diversity is one of those pious things that everyone says they support, while working as hard as they can to make it impossible.)

    Perhaps the best way to promote diversity is by having a variety of countries, each with its own artistic and intellectual traditions, it's own history and ways of doing things, and (yes) sometimes its own religious traditions as well.

    The problem with homogenizing the human race into some idealistic global... something, is that it's always assumed that Western Euro/American assumptions will become the world's new culture. Everyone will be expected to embrace democracy, the emancipation of women, gay-rights, and all the rest of it. But why? Why not Shariah law instead? Why not follow God's revealed social order?

    So instead of trying to make everyone the same (which typically means remaking everyone else in our own image) we need to accept that some countries out there, and some countries' cultures, some of the ways-of-living that other people prefer, are going to look very different than what we might personally favor.
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2017
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,290
    Or take the other approach: instead of choosing between making everyone the same or allowing whatever anyone "prefers" (whose preferences count?), we adopt the liberal point of view:

    We specify a few features or characteristics of setups we will not allow, a limited and clearly defined set regardless of anyone's "preference", and forbid coercion in any other respect. We are confident that a great diversity of ways of living will remain, with these few features disallowed.

    Because as a government it's a form of totalitarianism, and itself disallows many "ways of living" that people under its authority prefer. It's self-contradictory, in other words, to equip Sharia religious edicts with physical coercion under the principle of "what people prefer".

    Nothing in US law prevents anyone from living according to Sharia prescriptions, for example. But if they are made US law, people will be prevented from living otherwise - as they are, in Saudi Arabia. So that is forbidden, in the US, on liberal principles.
     
  10. ethernos Registered Member

    Messages:
    87
    i think God's rule were for past when people were given different hierarchy .....Potter's son a potter,king's son a king.....but if it were to be applied now,to us.it would not work out with our level of understanding we'd be trying to king ourselves....if all man were equal in God's eyes.he would not have created such systems.i think at that time people were always fighting...,so he might had to built a system to seperate other...rule change and still change with time....cultural diversity is also what i believe in but it is much more different subject.for example take india said to be the most culturally diversed nation.but still united as a country.so,i think that's what the world should be cultural difference,individuality but still united as a whole world.but how do we do it without warring each other.I'm sure that day will come but can we do it without war??
     
  11. pluto2 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    768
    Religion has no basis in reality and that's why it needs to die.

    Religion instills false hope and a false sense of optimism in people and that's why it's dangerous because religion is totally out of touch with the cruel world that we live in.

    The fact is that we live in a cruel universe that doesn't give a damn about us.

    Also humanity is not that successful socially, technologically and scientifically.

    Our science is still very primitive and there are tons of things that we still don't know yet.

    I could bet millions of dollars that there are alien civilizations somewhere out there in the universe who are far more successful than we are right now.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2017
    ethernos likes this.
  12. ethernos Registered Member

    Messages:
    87
    i don't mind dying carrying a false hope.
     
  13. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,606
    From ForrestDean Post 20
    Getting rid of religious notions would probably solve a lot of problems. Unfortunately, this solution to problems is not likely to occur for many decades, if not centuries.

    Religious beliefs have a strong grip on the minds of folks in many cultures.​

    Religion is dangerous because it can be used by demagogues who appeal to those who tend not to think for themselves.

    Consider Jones who founded a cult & ended up with a lot of people voluntarily drinking Koolade laced with poison.

    Faith is a poor replacement for common sense & thoughtful analysis.​

    Getting rid of the notion of counties sounds good if you do not consider the implications which seem to be variations on the following.

    Anarchy, which does not seem practical for any culture other than one populated entirely by saints.​

    BTW: A culture populated by saints might be very boring.​

    A single world wide government.​

    I worry about the direction of the USA toward a strong central government with too much control & the ability of demagogues to appeal to those without much common sense.​

    A world wide government would undoubtedly be subject to more bureaucratic overhead than we currently have in the USA, which is already too much.​
     
  14. ForrestDean Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    291
    I agree. The global society, as it is today, is seemingly nowhere near ready for this kind of transition or mindset, which is why I later made post number 22 above:
    I feel it may require several horrific catastrophic events to alter our mindset, lifestyle, values, and priorities. But then again, predicting the path of the global collective consciousness is extraordinarily difficult - like predicting the path of a large flock of birds or school of fish.

    Maybe if a unique catalyst were to take place at the right time and place it could somehow alter the way in which we live and how we interact with our environment and ecosystem that we depend upon for survival.
     
  15. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,162

    Have you forgotten the non religious society created by Wladimir Ulianov it lasted 70 years were people lost their hope and now the people that land are embracing all kind of religion . Religion gives hope for mankind, Secularism gives nothing to man . When man does not have hope, in frustration he hide himself in drugs and final step is suicide. That great society of Ulianov produced alcoholics and high suicide / 100000. Now America is becoming more secular and the number of suicide is increasing .
     
  16. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,290
    America has been one of the most religious First World countries for a century now, and also had one of the highest suicide rates.

    The more secular wealthy countries have lower suicide rates than the US, in general, and always have.

    When comparing statistics, btw, one must correct for the greater accuracy and honesty of the more secular societies - the Scandinavian countries, for example, include careful estimates of the proportion of single car accidents and drug/alcohol poisonings that are suicides, and even eating disorders are sometimes included. The US doesn't even do that for guys who die while "cleaning their guns".

    Religious societies lie to themselves, a lot.
     
  17. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,959
    Russia was Russia, before Lenin and after Lenin. There's no reason to think that religion ever made it a better place.
     
  18. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,162
    Why don't you check out wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate years 1985-2017
    You will see the former communist country and Scandinavian country have higher suicide rate than the USA
     
  19. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,290
    I warned you about those kinds of statistics: the US, being religious, lies to itself about all kinds of things - especially suicide.

    Your link also warned you not to do what you did there, not to make that comparison - like this:
    You can of course make such comparisons - you just have to be careful, and not accept official reports, especially from religious countries in matters such as suicide (or abortion, or venereal disease, or religious affiliation, or frequency of premarital sex, or crime by clerics, or the status of women, etc). Religious people lie a lot about those kinds of things.
     
  20. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,162

    I will go this far, in religious society there is a wide spectra in followers, so I see is improper to make a comparison . While I believe among secular there might not be diversity, of course if you add the agnostics.
     

Share This Page