Hello,

Simple and short question;

Whether religion is social or natural?

Best wishes.

Nature vs. Nurture at the species level? hmmm. I think the evidence points to nature.

I'd say polytheism is natural, and it's natural that religion would spring from that, but I haven't given it any real thought, just passing thought, of which is far less effective.

Kumar: religion and natural are mutually exclusive, you just cant have natural religion, that in itself is an oxymoron.
thus religion must be and can only be a social construct.

Kumar: religion and natural are mutually exclusive, you just cant have natural religion, that in itself is an oxymoron.
thus religion must be and can only be a social construct.

Sorry, I meant to ask, do we follow nature or society, when we follow religion? What any religion suggests to follow, society or nature?

Nature vs. Nurture at the species level? hmmm. I think the evidence points to nature.

Nurture can be of two types, natural and unnatural. Mother nurshing her childern normally can still be nature but abnormally may not.

If evidance points out to nature, all other species might had been following eligion in some form or the other? Is it not true that advocating, practicing and following religion is limited to humans only?

Haven't seen any monkeys in the pews recently.

Hello,

Simple and short question;

Whether religion is social or natural?

Best wishes.

It's our nature to be social so....

Neither. Religion is man-made. Christianity is God-made. Religions have distorted the Bible for their own selfish gains.

Sorry, I meant to ask, do we follow nature or society, when we follow religion? What any religion suggests to follow, society or nature?social, it's that simple, people are sheep after all very easily lead, especially those who are undereducated, however if you are refering to a civilization, which is a advanced state of human society, this is where religion ceases to exist.

Haven't seen any monkeys in the pews recently.but seen plenty of people up trees.
it seems that monkeys are, more rational then, the religious.

I thought you meant faith in general. There is a propensity towards faith in humans, what it it you want to hear?

Sorry, it is not clear. Btw, whether relgions try to balance in between social and nature or maintain nature within social framework? We don't see other species following somewhat religion. If natural, how it is only meant for humans?

Hello,

Simple and short question;

Whether religion is social or natural?

Best wishes.

if god is social (has different relationships with different persons), what then?

In otherwords what if the social mechanism is the ultimate foundation of existence (even chickens have a pecking order)

Its all in the nature , ie. Genetic programming of our brains.

I am Atheist but when my threads are moved to PseudoScience or closed, and i get very depressed i tend to say things as if someone will listen to them. So subconsciously i start to pray something.

Well that makes Atheist very strong people because they are going beyond their programming by following logical thinking.

Unnatural.

Moreso for some than others, of course.

Well that makes Atheist very strong people because they are going beyond their programming by following logical thinking.

So, being strong just means that you think others are weak?

So, being strong just means that you think others are weak?

Think,

U r down depressed and there is absolutely no hope; nothing can be done to make your situation better.

At that moment , do u have guts to say,

"GOD , U son of a Bitch, How dare u let this happen ?"

At that moment , do u have guts to say,

"GOD , U son of a Bitch, How dare u let this happen ?"

um... why not? i don't understand why i would need guts to say it. it seems just logical to be angry at god if he created us.

but it doesn't make any sense to me because i don't think anything is god's fault either and maybe i don't know what you're talking about :bugeye:

It's both, Kumar. I suppose how that works depends on how you look at it. If you look at society as a part of nature, the social function of religion is its natural function. At that point, though, the question of "Which God?" is finished, and the more relevant inquiry is, "What the hell is this God thing, anyway?"

In other words, it's not a matter of which religion is right, but of what religion actually does.

In altering the relationship between society and nature, we alter the outcome of the inquiry. The purpose of religion changes as we tinker with the relationship between society and nature. And that part just gets long, speculative, and often downright silly.

um... why not? i don't understand why i would need guts to say it. it seems just logical to be angry at god if he created us.

but it doesn't make any sense to me because i don't think anything is god's fault either and maybe i don't know what you're talking about :bugeye:

Well the theist that i have seen till date wont do such a thing, may be u r from SciForums :)

Still, it is confusing. Whether religion is meant to direct its followers, to practice socially by considering GOD/Nature as king/supreme whereas society to follow socially by considering King/Government/judiciory as supreme?

Still, it is confusing. Whether religion is meant to direct its followers, to practice socially by considering GOD/Nature as king/supreme whereas society to follow socially by considering King/Government/judiciory as supreme?

it is absurd to talk of god without there being social ramifications ("there is an omnipotent, omniscient supreme controller of all affairs - oh and BTW just do whatever you like ...)

generally you see that in religious societies the king is seen as a representative of god - in otherwords kingly duties are established in scripture (Therefore King Henry was not such a great king ....)

Yes, but people also talk about free will.

Yes, but people also talk about free will.
so there one is free to accept or reject the social ramifications of god's existence but one is not free to accept or reject the concomitant results of such rejection or acceptance

Ok, let us evalute impacts on following religion on self, society and nature?

One extreme, whether attaining salvation is reversing to origional nature/substance?

Ok, let us evalute impacts on following religion on self, society and nature?

One extreme, whether attaining salvation is reversing to origional nature/substance?
since salvation refers to being 'saved' from the onslaughts of illusion, I would agree

since salvation refers to being 'saved' from the onslaughts of illusion, I would agree

What in a wave, will you define as a reversal to origional form, up, down or straight line in between ups and downs?

What in a wave, will you define as a reversal to origional form, up, down or straight line in between ups and downs?

I don't know if you could refer to a portion of a wave being the origin, since waves are essentially continuums

I don't know if you could refer to a portion of a wave being the origin, since waves are essentially continuums

A wave has crests and troughs. If you will draw a line in between it will be a straight line. That line can tell us a balance. As there is no origin, we have to consider straight line as basis/creator of creasts and troughs, which are just a modification of straight line effected by environment.

(Therefore King Henry was not such a great king ....)Which one? There have been a few...

Haven't seen any monkeys in the pews recently.

This is by far the cleverest thing I've heard Icy say :)



Religion is completely a social entity. It was enhanced as a political tool at the advent of christianity.

However, humans have a propensity to be somewhat sensationalistic, or even succeptible to superstition. This is one of the reasons why religion is so hard to be rid of.

Fantastic.

Social; when we were without society, we weren't even smart enough to imagine Gods. Also, when there wasn't society, there was no communication, or language, so there was no way for any 'god' to communicate with us.

Is religion genetic or social? Hmm...

Earthquakes, floods, lightning, the stars, the sun...all of these things that were mysterious to us, needed to be attributed to something. And logically speaking, with no knowledge of the universe, it wasn't a bad call to think that a Greater Power was responsible for it all.

So I guess our belief in a higher power is a mechanism for us to cope with things we can't understand. Actually, if you think about, the notion of "god" has been replaced in modern times, at least in some part, by the notion of extraterrestrial life. There are small groups of people who actually believe strange lights they see in the sky to be UFOs from outer space!

That boils down to "I can't explain it, therefore it must be greater than me." I mean, when is the last time you heard a Believer claim that the peoples of Planet X were anything less than thousands of years more advanced than us? It always comes back to the idea that something out there is much more powerful, and much greater than we are. Be it God, Allah, the secret governments, Space Aliens, or whatever.

So I guess it's basically the result of our ability to think in abstractly, coupled with our ability to reason, that creates this need for a higher power.

Of course, the reason the religions of thousands of years ago are still thriving today is because they are based on fear, and fantastic promises. If they did not offer both reward and punishment, there would be no followers. I think the evidence that not one of them is true is that there have been so many forms of religion, all believing in different things. That in itself says that the belief in a god or gods is nothing more than a byproduct of being an intelligent being.

I'd love to see what would happen if we could raise a group of infants to adulthood in a bubble. I'd love to see what they would believe, what their religious structure would be, if there was one at all. That would prove this once and for all.

Snatching/stealing for food, reactions due to sexual vigour etc., needed for basic need is a crime in society, I think also in relgion, but still may not be in nature/as per GOD. As such, where we stand?

A wave has crests and troughs. If you will draw a line in between it will be a straight line. That line can tell us a balance. As there is no origin, we have to consider straight line as basis/creator of creasts and troughs, which are just a modification of straight line effected by environment.

????
I am afraid that I have lost your point

????
I am afraid that I have lost your point

Pls look at wave images and try to understand.