Originally posted by Bosse de NageThere are many corrupt political and social ideologies that stem from intentional misunderstanding of, and misapplication of scientific knowledge, and evolution has spawned these too. Herbert W. Spencer and the eugenicists in his wake may have elevated their particular delusions into something resembling religion.
It's more likely that elements of evolutionary theory would be coopted into a belief system. Wasn't the formalisation of social Darwinism -- libertarianism?
I might also argue that some of the self-proclaimed patriots that coordinate the so-called tea parties here in the US have embraced a truncated variation of American civil religion that has strong affinities with some of the ideologies of the eugenicists, although they might differ in the main on certain elements of biological knowledge.
In the case of American civil religion, the strong emotional attachments to such symbols as the flags, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution would seem clearly to constitute religion. In debates between scientists and anti-scientists, these emotions are often enough in evidence to offer support for recognition of science as a religion, and certain manifestations of Christianity to see the objective quest for truth as a threat to their belief system.
Originally posted by PalynkaDoes bare atheism count as a belief system? I'm not sure that it does. I imagine that all atheists have in common is a lack of belief in the existence of the supernatural, which they share with many adherents of the religion known as Buddhism.
If you define religion to be a completely meaningless concept, maybe.
But I'll bite. National Atheism Day. What's religious about it?
Originally posted by Bosse de NageIs this just boiling down to semantics again,or is there something more to this 'atheist' tag?
Does bare atheism count as a belief system? I'm not sure that it does. I imagine that all atheists have in common is a lack of belief in the existence of the supernatural, which they share with many adherents of the religion known as Buddhism.
Originally posted by karoly aczelAn atheist is someone who doesn't believe in the supernatural. Is not believing in the supernatural a belief system in itself or merely an isolated belief? I believe you can generate a system from the still turning point of atheism, but I'd bet most atheists haven't done so.
Is this just boiling down to semantics again,or is there something more to this 'atheist' tag?
Not picking on atheists here, they don't have the cultural advantages of most indentured believers ...
Originally posted by Bosse de NageLike 'supernarural' to me is just 'natural'. So I ask whether it is just a question of semantics for atheists? Is it natural to dream? Are 'supernatural' themes contained in dreams?And so on...
An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in the supernatural. Is not believing in the supernatural a belief system in itself or merely an isolated belief? I believe you can generate a system from the still turning point of atheism, but I'd bet most atheists haven't done so.
Not picking on atheists here, they don't have the cultural advantages of most indentured believers ...
Originally posted by WulebgrAs usual, spot on.
So is good history by this logic and definition. Religion then comes to encompass so many disparate phenomena as to be a useless term.
That's part of the inadequacy of this dictionary definition, which focuses of creedal formations instead of the more general, and clearly religious, manifestations of behavioral responses to sacred symbols.
If science h ...[text shortened]... ate in any sense to say evolution is a religion, but science might have those qualities.
I like the simplest definition the best:
Religion is any man-made system designed to receive the approbation of a diety.
Originally posted by KellyJayReligion- Any man made system of rites and rituals designed to establish a relationship with God based on human effort.
How do you define religion?
Kelly
Everything except Christianity.
True Christianity is a faith which relies solely on what God has done for us.
It's all on His terms, not ours.
Originally posted by PalynkaI see!
It's not about falsification. Durkheim (and you) focus on the social role of religion and how society shapes and is shaped by it. What I'm saying is that for me any belief about a non-chaotic supernatural is religious. This definition encompasses parts of yours (so it's not about proving you wrong), but excludes the political dogmas that you mentions.
You ...[text shortened]... them both in abstract and in practice.
So, in a sense, we're talking in cross-purposes.
So, what do you think about the theocracies? Are they based on a non-chaotic supernatural religious core belief that it is mutated also into a political dogma?
😵