This I felt in my life. Is religion and illusion? This is the question which i have no logical explanation as an answer.First of all what is religion?and where is god?I have'nt met GOD till now yet I have prayed in temples,church and mosques throughout my life.
After an extensive study I am came to the conclusion that God and religion both are creation of human mind.Or is it a reflex of our own social condition?Its an illusion which actually alienates from the actual problem in our society.By the perpetual work for others throughout our life and toil for a minimal subsistence religion gives us the hope for a better life after death!
God is interpreted by religion in different ways for different classes in our society.Imagine GOD is different for every people!Religion swallows our highest aspirations and ideals and alienates us to a mythical being called God which we have never seen!This is the biggest tragedy of human life.
No matter what happens we have to fight the fog of religion in our society with the weapon of science instead of praying to God.Together we can and we will achieve this whole phoebia of God and throw it to medieval ages where it belongs.
we all are god and there is one GOD .Humans.
|
Written by Phil (6836 comments posted) 17th February 2007 | I wouldn't go as far as likening humans to god - but I see your point. I also don't think we need 'the weapon of science,' just straight forward reason would do.
Basically, I sympathise with your point, but I could argue some of the details.
Having said that, the essay itself is a little over simple in construction. It also needs a thorough edit.
Phil. |
Written by Fledermaus (3448 comments posted) 18th February 2007 | 'The weapon of science'... Isn't it strange that many people seem to take scientists as their priests and follow them without doubt, just because they claim to know a little bit more about the universe?
Scientists aren't that different from priests. They have their debates, their fundamentally different views, even their religious wars and unfortunately many of them claim to know the absolute truth.
Wasn't the twentiest century a battlefield between quantum physics and relativity theory? So which one explains the true nature of the universe?
I supose the only rational view on God, the universe, anything is that we do not know and we cannot know. Socrates found that out thousands of years ago, Decartes reinvented the idea and (as Phil calls it) straight forward reason always seems to lead me to the same conclusion.
And since we do not know, it's up to individuals to choose what to believe and what not.
|
Written by Marybarry (237 comments posted) 18th February 2007 | In all sincerity: HOW I ENVY THOSE who DO BELIEVE.
I don't, and therefore in times of problems I can only Wait!
Up to now ,all problems resolve themselves, just by waiting. That is, if I have tried all possible solutions at my disposal.
About SCIENCE, I am always baffled, that for every solution found, new questions appear.
 marybarry
Your piece is thought provoking. |
Written by johniebg (553 comments posted) 18th February 2007 | Well this is an interesting topic you raise and one I feel compelled to comment on, first in respect to your short essay. This is a subject close to all our hearts and for such a subject you manage a fairly dispassionate discourse. You seem to have given this considerable thought and have come up with some excellent conclusions. I particularly like the one in which 'we' are all gods, and I think closer to the truth than most people would comprehend.
There is a wishy washy section of the populace that think just because you cannot prove or disprove god exists that there is no way of coming to a reasonable answer, but that is rubbish in itself. Of course god as a supernatural being doesn't exist, you only have to look at what man has done to mankind over the last 2000 years to see that we are devoid of anything supernatural and therefore godlike other than our own desire to subvert humanity, the principle for which religion has been used through time: to control. Just because something cannot be disproved does not make it potentially a truth, else there would be some credence for worshipping the Pilsner god of which I am a particular fan. Who says the pilsner god does not exist - prove it.
There is good cause though to look further into the human mind, of which we know very little and see there some part of the subconscious that hooks into the human conscious. This combined with the little we know on how evolution and natural selection works make for mouth watering prospects in the future for discovering where our God Delusion really comes from.
As for science, the use of which along with archaeology is most likely to provide us with an insight into our origins and purpose, certainly religion isn't, it relies too much on hiding the facts from us: Adam and Eve indeed!
We should of course be wary of any information given to us by mankind, whether scientists or not, until chance has been had to cross reference and check.
Evocative essay, good stuff, would like to hear more as you expand your thoughts.
|
Written by Fledermaus (3448 comments posted) 18th February 2007 | "Just because something cannot be disproved does not make it potentially a truth, else there would be some credence for worshipping the Pilsner god of which I am a particular fan. Who says the pilsner god does not exist - prove it."
I won't mind you worshiping the Pilsner god as long as you don't kill people for it  And logically, something which is not proven untrue is potentially true.
Until black swans were discovered it was considered, by induction, that all swans were white. But that no-one on the northern hemisphere had ever seen a black swan did not mean that they did not exist.
The writer of this piece mentions 'science'. Now every scientist is suposed to know that induction is not a real proof and that theories get stronger by failed attempts at falsification.
Just calling a theory 'rubbish' and claiming that something is 'of course' true sound more like fundamentalist dogmas than like anything near to science.
It's rather ironic how often atheists seem to claim 'absolute truth'... |
Written by johniebg (553 comments posted) 18th February 2007 | Very good retort Fledermause, I would however like to point out that I am a 'fundamentalist atheist', would hate to be mistaken for anyone that just didn't believe in god, but could not back up their thoughts with a rational arguement 
If you presented me with a White Swan and said there is a chance we might one day find a black swan, I would slap you on the shoulder and bid we both go look together, because we know swans exists, there is a chance that nature would throw us all sorts of angles including two headed, three legged and one winged swans. They exist and where they exist will impact their form which is a basic premis of natural selection.
But we have swans, if you were to have the Jewish god rock up as the undeniable father of that religion, I might then have cause to believe that the god of Islam exists as well. But we have absolutely no evidence AT ALL that a supernatural god exists, and therefore must come to the conclusion that he does not. I hope you are discounting the ancient words of men as proof, we have already established the word of men is not to be trusted.
I would love to continue this sparring, very enjoyable, but suggest we take it elsewhere, least we hijack this thoughtful essay. |
Only registered users can rate and write comments.
Please login or register. Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
Previous item
