In thinking that people with faith or religion are deluded?

[Alouiseg]

This stems from another couple of threads i'm on but until God can be proven isn't religion just an outdated patriachal method of control?

I don't think anyone has to disprove the existance of God any more than we have to disprove the existence of leprechuans. If anyone wants to believe in something that requires no proof, then religion/faith is probably for them. Until then, I'll happily accept the existence of Africa over the existence of the pearly gates.

or because they have been brainwashed by another individual who has something wrong with them, JUstmytwopenceworth. (Agreeing with you)

That's fair enough - but when religion is used as the reason for the atrocity, I expect that faith to turn on that individual as a collective, and reject any alignment with them - but generally don't see much evidence of that.

But Maisie, unless you've been to Africa, you believe in something with no proof.

I don't believe in australia - have never been there - I think thumb is just making it all up (I KNOW Africa exists though as have been there)

How much level of proof do you need Tether before you can accept the existence of major land masses?

that's right Tocc! You've rumbled me (dammit!) I am still in some dreary suburban town in England really

Maisie, the trouble is that often the person who has the most wrong with them is the starter of the religion/cult, or becomes one of the leaders of it.

'Religion doesn't make people abuse others, or blow things up. That's something they do because there is something wrong with them, as an individual.'

I think that is at the heart of a lot of social problems. It is very popular way of looking at the world. We claim that the institutions we live under (not just religion, but also our economic system, legal system etc) are neutral, that they are not patriarchal, or racist, or classist. Instead we claim that it is individuals who have some kind of problem, not the system.

I'm not convinced that it is an individual problem.

astute post MillyR IMO

In which case it's up to the followers of that faith to reject their leader, or demand that they review their doctrines - or perhaps they are happy to follow the people who have the most wrong with them, in which case the followers are as deluded as their leader..

That's what I'm asking you maisie- we work on received wisdom.

You trust in maps to tell you that Africa is there
You trust in photographs of Africa
You trust in film of Africa

I could show you all those things of Narnia.

Unless you've been there, you have no proof- but we all believe in the existence of Africa; precisely because we all believe in it IYSWIM.

I think that is a little bit unreasonable maisie - if you consider that many people are brought up in the religion/cult, they are taught these things from a very young age by people they expect/are taught to be right and to respect.

I have no wish to insult Riven or any other Muslim here but is it not the case that suicide bombers of the Muslim faith believe that they will receive their reward in the afterlife (not sure about the actual terms of the reward) - for some people, that is a good incentive - for others it is a reason to question the religious teaching and to reject it. Depends on the person.

As far as I know Tether, Africa is not generally accepted as being a work of fiction by C S Lewis - so I'll work on the basis of that received wisdom.

Now - I suggest we leave the Africa v. Narnia line of reasoning, because I'm not real either (unless you've met me)

Tethersend, I can't believe that you are seriously arguing this point about Africa.

We have philosophical systems that we use to decide whether or not something is a fact. This is not usually based on personal observation, as personal observation can be incorrect for various reasons (rainbows appear to touch the ground a distance away, for example). There are many ways of demonstrating a fact, but a common way is that your observation is repeatable by others, and could be shown to be incorrect at some point, and has some explanation as to why it is a fact. Such observation would be used in your Africa example.

So a number of people have been to the physical area named Africa and seen that it physically exists. If I go to the claimed place, or a number of other people do, and it isn't there, then the claim can be falsified.

The existence of heaven and God has never been demonstrated, and cannot be falsified. Belief in such things is outside of rational thought. It isn't irrational, but it is non-rational.

Thumb - I was talking about the extreme atrocities that have been committed. Religion must not ever be used to excuse murder, rape etc. and the vast majority of followers of faith would not accept it either, but I think that religious leaders have much more of a part to play to leading, and that means being very vocal and clear in their rejection of all things atrocious that are done in the name of their faith.

Pixie, no, I absolutely am not saying that. I am saying that where there are problems with a group of people, they may be caused (in whole or part) by the system they are living under. As such, other people should challenge elements of that system.

And that does happen in religion. Christians (to use your faith as an example) will challenge and debate their own traditions and over time those traditions change. So Christianity now is generally less patriarchal than it was, say 200 years ago.

But that can take time and effort, because it can be hard to identify elements of a system that are related to unjust behaviour, and then even harder to challenge them.

But I am not saying that religion as a whole should be abandoned - sometimes elements of it need to be challenged.

Pixie, that was in answer to your previous post.

British people - us Scots know Africa exists, and I'm pretty sure the Welsh and the N Irish do too...

People 'claim' things all the time, but it does not mean that we have to accept them, or create a cult following or faith out of them. However, I'm pretty sure that I can buy a plane ticket to Africa, and having typed in Heaven as my destination...nope, not able to get there - despite the number of people throughout history who have claimed it's existence.

Oh for the love of god...

I am not trying to make anyone believe that Africa does not exist.

I am trying to dispute the idea that the existence of everything other than religion has been proven.

We believe many things on the word of others.

Pixie, people who claim to have visited heaven cannot provide a way of making their experience repeatable by other people who follow the same procedure, so it does not follow the accepted way of providing evidence.

I did actually explain that in my post. It is not about personal observation - your personal observation may be wrong. It is about making an observation that can then be repeated by anybody else who, when following the same procedure get the same result, and is strengthened by providing an explanation as to why the facts are as they are. This explanation should be based on further, observable evidence.

This is actually taught in school. It is in the national curriculum for year seven.

The biggest delusion that modern society holds is that faith is to be respected per se whereas surely it is what you do with your faith that counts