Religions put down the mind of mankind.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Claiming all that stuff comes from God, a god, the god, whatever, denigrates the creativity of mankind. Mankind is intelligent enough to have come up with every word

Religious inspiration and motivation hasn't denigrated human creativity; it has caused it flourish. It has produced stuff that both believers and non-believers can marvel at. Human creativity, and its produce, has been propelled to great heights, not denigrated.

Originally posted by @fmf
I do. Completely. And I have addressed it head on.

Try reading my previous post in its entirety before responding.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Try reading my previous post in its entirety before responding.

I did. I think you are mistaken. I think I have dealt with sonhouse's claims clearly and correctly. You are free to disagree of course.

Originally posted by @fmf
On the contrary, I do understand what he wrote and what he meant. Completely. And I have addressed it head on.

Okay. I'll simplify it even further. We're almost down to pablum here:

Mankind is intelligent enough to have come up with every word of every religious document and claiming that it all comes from god(s) denigrates the creativity of mankind.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Mankind is intelligent enough to have come up with every word of every religious document and claiming that it all comes from god(s) denigrates the creativity of mankind.

It does not denigrate it. As I have explained.

Originally posted by @fmf
It does not denigrate it. As I have explained.

So in your mind, claiming that man isn't intelligent enough to have come up with every word of every religious document doesn't denigrate the creativity of mankind?

Interesting.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
So in your mind, claiming that man isn't intelligent enough to have come up with every word of every religious document doesn't denigrate the creativity of mankind?

Interesting.

No, not when you see what the impact of religious inspiration has been. You should bear in mind that most religions look at the other religions they are in competition with and see those religious documents [and other products of religious inspiration] as existing because of human invention and creativity, and they see them as being 'godless'.

Do Muslims attributing to divine inspiration their achievements in mathematics and jurisprudence and art and music - and their holy texts - denigrate the creativity of mankind? I don't think so. The artists, and composers, and thinkers, and writers in question are lionized for their achievements. They do not become "denigrated" when they cite their god figures.

Originally posted by @fmf
No, not when you see what the impact of religious inspiration has been. You should bear in mind that most religions look at the other religions they are in competition with and see those religious documents [and other products of religious inspiration] as existing because of human invention and creativity, and they see them as being 'godless'.

Do Muslims at ...[text shortened]... onized for their achievements. They do not become "denigrated" when they cite their god figures.

Well, this is about as simple as I can make it. Pay attention here:

Man lacks the intelligence to have created the religious texts.

How exactly does the above claim not belittle the creativity of mankind?

Originally posted by @thinkofone
"Man lacks the intelligence to have created the religious texts."

People only believe this about some religious texts and that belief is wrapped up in their religious fervour. Investing so much certainty in what they believe to be the source of their inspiration may be misguided - they may even be dazzled and disorientated by what they have done - but I don't think it "denigrates" mankind. People, in fact, believe that 'man' does have the intelligence and creativity to have produced most religious texts.

Originally posted by @fmf
People only believe this about some religious texts and that belief is wrapped up in their religious fervour. Investing so much certainty in what they believe to be the source of their inspiration may be misguided - they may even be dazzled and disorientated by what they have done - but I don't think it "denigrates" mankind. People, in fact, believe that 'man' does have the intelligence and creativity to have produced most religious texts.

Well, I didn't really think to you'd actually answer the question that went along with the sentence that you took out of context.

Instead you answered a question of your own making. Just as you attacked a claim of your own making in response to Sonhouse's post.

It's what you do.

That said, I'm still not really sure whether or not it's a matter of you lacking the intelligence to understand the difference or if you're trolling. Though the more I interact with you, the more I'm inclined to think it's the former.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
That said, I'm still not really sure whether or not it's a matter of you lacking the intelligence to understand the difference or if you're trolling.

I think we just disagree, and I'm fine with that. I don't think my "intelligence", or supposed "lack" thereof, is the reason for us disagreeing. Nor can the difference of opinion that we have be explained by me supposedly "trolling"

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Well, I didn't really think to you'd actually answer the question that went along with the sentence that you took out of context. Instead you answered a question of your own making. Just as you attacked a claim of your own making in response to Sonhouse's post.

Well, I think you are mistaken. I have gone to the very heart of what sonhouse claims and why he claims it. He reckons, because he is an atheist, that religious people claiming all that stuff comes from God, a god, the god, whatever, denigrates the creativity of mankind. I think it does nothing of the sort. And I took the time to explain why.

Originally posted by @thinkofone

Man lacks the intelligence to have created the religious texts.

How exactly does the above claim not belittle the creativity of mankind?

Does religious sentiment and doctrine confuse believers about the actual source of their human creativity? Yes, sure. One could say that.

Does their human creativity fill them with a feeling of gratitude towards - or dependency on - their god figures? Yes, maybe.

Does it make some creative humans feel meek or modest or pious or empowered or inspired by their gods? Yes, so it would seem.

Is this attribution, gratitude, modesty - or even the feeling of subservience - misguided? Yes, I would say so (given my lack of belief in any gods having revealed themselves to anyone, it's hardly surprising).

But do these things "denigrate" humans? No. I don't think so.

It's an insight into the process of inspiration being turned into cultural artefacts and into how the creativity of the superstitious human mind works. I don't see it as a "denigration" of humans at all.

Originally posted by @fmf
Well, I think you are mistaken. I have gone to the very heart of what sonhouse claims and why he claims it. He reckons, because he is an atheist, that religious people claiming all that stuff comes from God, a god, the god, whatever, denigrates the creativity of mankind. I think it does nothing of the sort. And I took the time to explain why.

More responses from you that only pretend to engage. More responses where you instead respond to a distortion of what I have written.

It's what you do.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
More responses from you that only pretend to engage. More responses where you instead respond to a distortion of what I have written.

I think you're wrong about my contribution to this conversation. I think I am engaging what you're saying. If you want to respond to anything I have said, you should just go ahead and do so.