[ralfy]

Hence,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_religion

[JV153]

All roads lead to secularism.. what do you think a road is for ?
You find hints of something else in the religious works.

[evilgenius]

I think the only way to organize a political state is as a secular institution. While democracy may not be the only form of government it is perhaps the best. I think it is the best because it more readily in time reflects the will of the people.

Religion is at best something that helps to form a segment of the populace, contribute to their understanding so that they can form their will. Therefore, it cannot operate as the overarching idea that gives the state its mandate. Within a segment of the populace, as within the individual, there is always the panoply of human thought within which religion operates. What the metaphors say, and metaphors are almost always meant to be limited, is therefore understood within the context they occur. It takes the human mind to understand that context.

Within those who are weak, who cannot understand those outside themselves very well, religion tends to feed a self-centered fanaticism or an apocalyptic dream state that allows them to excuse unethical actions perpetrated against their fellow man. The same can be said for basic human selfishness outside of religion. Both of these mind states distort metaphor when it is held within context. Both of them have problems limiting the context of metaphor as well. The things is, when the state is organized as a religious institution it too lacks the human faculty for sorting out attitudes and restraining intentions. Religiously organized states almost invariably, therefore, devolve into tyrannies.

[ralfy]

Very likely the main driver of conflict for several decades has been not religious beliefs but realpolitik.

[onlooker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', 'V')ery likely the main driver of conflict for several decades has been not religious beliefs but realpolitik.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', '
')Unfortunately, before recent times for centuries religious fervor was a catalyst for conflict.

[onlooker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n some ways, we see similar today, but this time involving secular religions, with fervor directed towards the belief that numbers in hard drives represent wealth, that free market capitalism works, that utopia is possible through increasing prosperity or state control, that some races or cultures are superior to others, that there are technofixes to a world with physical limitations, etc.

[SeaGypsy]

Capitalism is not new, merely the scale & machinery of capitalism is. The Messiah is as he was, the 'Son of Man' as much as of God, who is found within before without.

Technology serves purposes as does capitalism, neither is necessarily evil, just the sum total effects are- the road to hell being paved in good intentions. The religious vs atheist debate at the core of this argument avoids key issues- population, resource economics, then geopolitics, AGW, constraint vs free market etc etc.

As MD mentioned, Nero's fiddle.

The take on all this has to be, God or Nogod, put yourself & kin in the best situation you can according to your best rationale & ability. Believe whatever you like about the extra terrestrials, but do be awake to what is really happening now & likely issues moving forward. The kids born now & recently are likely to be living in a declining world their whole lives, almost an inversion of the current paradigm economically, so those of us with kids & grandkids have much to ponder about legacy. It's not all bad.

Sent from my HUAWEI Y520-U33 using Tapatalk

[onlooker]

I think Sea relating Capitalism and Technology with religion was about the fervor and total faith people have in these same. Also, the combination of Capitalism and Technology along of course with the discovery of fossil fuels paved the way for this hyper industrialized rapacious spree humanity has been on. Oh yes the contraction will be as relentless as the Growth has been. I hope all your plans are coming out well. I am sure they are as you are a proactive person from all accounts.

[SeaGypsy]

If we think about capitalism as a religion, & religious institutions generally prospering according to their accommodations 'Castles in Heaven', then mankind's ancient proclivity to totemism, - Capitalism treated as religion makes sense, as does it's success- despite it's many failings & imperfections, it has brought relative prosperity to many billions of people. My rant above is more about distraction & the theme is one of the most futile distractions on offer. Take some of the posters here who have radically changed life paths in awareness of the issues discussed here- Ibon, Pops, Carinke, Loki, Monte, Newfie & more, does it matter a fig their religion or lack thereof? I doubt it. I don't see countries succeeding long term, all are going to face huge unsolvables they are busily ignoring. I do see people, doing very cool things, in many locales around the world, which give me a sense of hope in a variety of pathways.

Currently I stick with trucking, JIT transport, with a couple of other rods in the fire, carpentry, building a sailing canoe (proa) & possibly starting a disability tourism company. I work for a Tasmanian company in Melbourne, so I have a finger on the pulse of one of the best remote cool low population regions in the world- likely my semi retirement home next few years.

[ennui2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')That question isn't relevant. It's what evil things good people have done in the name of religion.

[evilgenius]

I said, "I think the only way to organize a political state is as a secular institution. While democracy may not be the only form of government it is perhaps the best. I think it is the best because it more readily in time reflects the will of the people."

For what it's worth I should clarify something. I don't think ethics depends upon the consensus of the people to discover right and wrong. It does in some respects, where several forms of equally capable ways of going about doing something exist and the people's liking for one over the other makes the determination, for instance. Basic things that can be deduced from either experience or reason, though, aren't subject to that. So democracy is best when the people are more informed, when there is an element of introspection flowing within a people. That being said, monarchies can be secular states. So can the types of pseudo-monarchies which we see from time to time and place to place, like the old Soviet Union or your average president for life African ruler.

The ancients thought that democracy always devolved into mob rule. Given the kinds of populations they had, and their understanding of ethics, they were mostly right. Today we understand democracy to exist within a system of rights, at least in the world's more developed countries. Strangely, we didn't hear George Bush advocate for those rights amongst those people he decided to wage war against. Instead, he advocated for democracy all by itself, as if it were a kind of religion or religious element. Perhaps his suggestion came from the same place, pitting factions together and sorting out the winners and losers, that capitalism essentially espouses, along with its mostly monetarist high priests. 'There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreampt of in your philosophy, Horatio.'

[onlooker]

Here is another messiah Julian Simon arguing " Arguing that the ultimate resource is the human imagination coupled to the human spirit, Julian Simon led a vigorous challenge to conventional beliefs about scarcity of energy and natural resources, pollution of the environment, the effects of immigration, and the "perils of overpopulation." From his book the Ultimate Resource. If that is not quasi religious fervor that informs this opinion I do not know what is. I suppose if I met him I would ask him how will this ultimate resource that are humans be fed, medically cared for, housed, employed etc. in this Utopian future he envisions.

[aldente]

Plantagentes god entity as of page 5 holds up quite well and is impressive !

Is there a direct connection btw. "our" Plantagenet and the historical Plantagentes over there in Europe?

[evilgenius]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Timo', 'B')TW, the fundamental nature of good and evil are moral standards, not religious standards. Religion simply high-jacked those moral standards to promote themselves over all of the other religions out there. When push comes to shove, however, religion does not define good or evil.

[onlooker]

To me the biggest problem with Religions among others, is that it shifts the onus of ethical choice to a man made construct presided over by Man. Thus, by adopting a Religion, we are in fact allowing our morality to be defined by others. I like very much Timo's post in which he separated morality from Religion. That gets at this necessary bifurcation. Each one of us must in our lifetimes make moral choices. That is the nature of human societies and the human condition. We for better or worse can discern that actions have consequences and that those consequences may harm or help other living beings. So, morality is a deeply personal matter best decided on without coercion or interference from others.