To think it’s unwise to lose the idea of God(s) in society?

[Digita]

To think it’s unwise to lose the idea of God(s) in society?

Whenever I hear people arguing why faith in any sort of higher being is 'stupid' or 'delusional' I wonder if they've thought through the wider implications of a godless society. It might not be all that it's cracked up to be... the idea of higher beings might be invented but invented for a reason too. Is there a need for a philosophical concept of something more for accountability, law and order?

“Society needs reasons for people to tell the truth even when it is to their disadvantage.” Why swear on a Bible? The Courts have kept swearing an oath on religious texts because there’s still a psychological, moral force behind it.

"Co-operation is a key component in human interaction and also, according to new research from the University of British Columbia, the spread of civilisation. Not because for any altruistic reason, though; instead it might be directly down to a fear of a vengeful god." Fear of punitive gods linked to rise of human civilisation’

‘A new study published in the journal, Nature, tests the theory that communities are fair and cooperate with outsiders because of the fear of divine retribution.’ ‘Moralistic gods, supernatural punishment and the expansion of human sociality’

Swearing an oath on the Bible (or any other religious tome), would mean the same to me as swearing an oath on a copy of The 3 Bears. To me it's just a book that holds no meaning or truth to me. If others believe it to be the word of whatever God they follow then fair enough, but, as I said, it means nothing to me.

@Malie stop peddling the Atheist Atrocities Fallacy. It's bullshit.

So, do you think polytheism, as in Hinduism?

I last read that there were 33 million gods and goddesses (and growing) in Hinduism.

Some say it's more a way of life than religion.

That's not strictly speaking an accurate picture of it - human civilization develops either way, it just develops differently depending upon the collective morals imposed upon members of society living in it at the time.

And those morals weren't imposed to develop society in the way that we think of it now - it was during the rise of agrarian societies that it became necessary to organise people collectively in order to settle and control the land, and the animals and other resources within that land. Not only because you need to organise large groups of people to feed large groups of people, but because they also need to hold and protect that land against invasion, and make it through times of hardship when crops fail, both of which involve the deaths of many people.

Essentially sometimes people would be forced to die so others could thrive, and the ones who thrived had to make it more palatable than just saying you and your family are expendable so I can feed my family. Instead you make it a 'sacrifice' for a greater purpose, they will be rewarded in another life, etc etc.

It didn't really develop society as such - it did help to develop it to an extent, but before that it was developed because of it, and sometimes even developed in spite of it.

Surely laws (and, yes, I understand the morality basis for laws) could perform the same function? I expect they do for a lot of people.

There's a lot in between saying that belief in God is necessary for morality and saying that it should be illegal.

Societies that punish 'thoughtcrime' are rarely good societies, whether they punish belief in God, or lack of belief in God, or belief in the wrong God, or the wrong sort of belief in the same God (Catholics vs Protestants; Sunnis vs Shiites).

I certainly don't think belief in God should be illegal!

So, if there is a God then you wouldn't know anyway because you don't appraise or engage with the possibility in any meaningful way.

Tis folly to be wise when ignorance is bliss.

In my case, it would be more accurate to have said that I don't have any 'what ifs' any more. Because I was raised in a Christian family, and was a convinced believer into my early 20s. You are in fact, completely and utterly wrong in your glib assertion, appraising and engaging was exactly what I did. My 'what ifs' were 'what if there isn't a God, after all", I suppose. And the conclusion was that everything then made a lot more sense. God was not necessary for any rational hypothesis.

Like the atheists peddle the ‘all the problems of the world are down to religion’ BS?

When we consider what is known about God, actually comes from human's, then why believe in how the being maybe especially when other humans created them.

What we know about the stars comes from humans too but you’re not seriously suggesting that humans created the stars are you?

You can have the best laws, but rules alone don't mean enforcement. Rules, for a lot of people, are annoying and restrictive. The psychological fear of divine retribution may be like cost-effective enforcement of the rules.

"I expect they do for a lot of people." - why? People are intrinsically selfish. If they can get away with something, they will. That's where the possibility of a god watching the behaviour is like spiritual CCTV and a deterrent for bad behaviour.

What we know about the stars comes from humans too but you’re not seriously suggesting that humans created the stars are you

What was I saying upthread about some people not understanding evidence....

With regards to religion and texts that were wrote eons ago, we only have their words for it,

with science, galaxies etc, scientists can use various equipment to understand the universe, without relying on eons old information.

You can have the best laws, but rules alone don't mean enforcement.

Laws, plus effective policing. There are many reasons for the decline in religiousity over the last couple of centuries, but perhaps the invention of the detective - and the development of forensics (and actual cctv) helped.

"What we know about the stars comes from humans too but you’re not seriously suggesting that humans created the stars are you?"

That's hilarious. 😂

It feeds into another point about gods/divinity. For some people, mathematics is evidence of gods/divinity and it's the language of the universe, nature/biology and all a bit too perfect to be by chance.

Humans didn't invent things like the Fibonacci sequence; they observed and discovered it in nature, then applied it to maths.

I agree that advancements in technology have helped loads, albeit relatively recently, in human existence. So, the roots of 'god is watching you' on spiritual CCTV are still there.

There's also still the problem of policing effective policing. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. But add that there might be a 'higher power' than them watching them on spiritual CCTV, then it might make some think twice...

It seems that those with wealth and power need the idea of spiritual CCTV 'Smile you're on GodCam'. 😂

If a god's existence is unknowable then surely by extension it's will must also be unknowable?

If it's will is unknowable then why would think your religion is the correct religion?

@Malie of course religion isn't responsible for all the world's ills. Neither is secularism or atheism. I think the problem is with authoritarianism, where freedom to think, question and speak out is not permitted. That happens in dictatorships like China and North Korea, but it also happens in organised religions. And of course in Russia, the Russian Orthodox Church is hand in hand with Putin, so they get it from both sides.

But back to the thread - is belief in God essential for a functioning society? I think it isn't. I think the things that we perceive as 'good' and assign to religion - things like common laws that keep society ticking over, people taking care of each other - are about the survival of people as a species, so more an evolutionary driver. The majority of people don't want to break down the society they live in, so obey the law.

We get our evidence from reason. I believe in God because I use the same reason

@Digita I couldn't care less about god when I make my decisions about how I live my life. I follow my conscience. Not lying, cheating, stealing, killing etc. is actually pretty easy to do, no deity required.

Just look through your post and see the numbers of unprovable assumptions you have just made based entirely from your own worldview, many of which do not exist in other societies

How and what is your evidence and reasoning for a mythic being ?

I would.say @pointythings , that's quite a good analysis

I agree. Removing religion (and therefore both its hierarchy and access to the more vulnerable) merely creates a void. One that doesn’t stay unfilled. New names, new ideologies, new Though Leaders, new willing minions who love a bit of pitchforks, new yelling of “burn heretic”.

And a brand new, evolving hierarchy for predators to climb. Being new it will have even less capacity to weed out the more obvious ones that try to worm their way up. Being new they won’t have the long, ugly history of cover ups revealed. So will probably try their own versions of “controlling the narrative” at the cost of the victims. While the young and vulnerable collateral damage piles high.

What is your reasoning for considering him a mythic being?