Thursday 20 September 2007

About religion

Boing Boing-post that shows the unbelievable stupidity of humanity. On the comments there is this line, the reason I wrote this post;

But why is it so hard for people to accept that maybe, just maybe, the people who compiled the Bible and told stories over six thousand years ago were possibly trying to just figure it out, just like we are today?
It is attributed to AndrewJC, who is the author of post #19. This pretty much sums my views on religion, and thus deserves a post of its own. It's far better said than anything I did in the Jehova's Witnesses-post a while back.

4 comments:

  1. I don't see how this relates to religion much, especially to the Bible. The bigger point is that people really don't give a rat's ass about our world, about finding out what it is what where it will go and where we fit in besides the things that relate directly to them.

    I am reminded of an article in an Israeli news site describing a new discovery regarding the future of our own sun (a new telescope showed us the end of the life of a star similar to our sun). A lot of the replies were something like "what a waste of money".

    Finally, the ancient Hebrews didn't really try to figure anything out. That's part of the point - contrary to the Greeks, for example, there was no particular need for the Hebrews or any of their neighbors to explain anything in the natural world, besides maybe as an afterthought. They were content with myths that weren't even original. Note that the Bible concentrates on humans - on behavior and morals and why bad things happen and how to make good things happen. Just the sort of thing Mrs. Shepherd cares, while excluding everything else.

    The point is not human stupidity. The point is human short-sightedness, self-delusion and ignorance.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The quote was mostly meant to be in reference to the thinking that if something was said in the Bible, that is the Truth, and that's why evolution, for examble, is wrong.

    I dislike when people shut their brains against new ideas just because one explanation was already given in the Bible.

    Thus (and I'm not going into the existence of God here), everything should be judged on their own merits (or, as religion often is, by your own feelings) and something should not be given priority just because "Bible says so". As they point in the Boing Boing-discussion, Bible often disagrees with itself!

    I'm not really sure what you were answering here, and why you come across so very angry.
    Were you angry about the tangent between the Boing Boing-post and the Bible, about the quote itself or about keeping - in general - open mind? Because I would like to discuss it, but it's so very hard to defend your viewpoint if you can't figure where the attack is coming from.

    When I wrote the post, I was mostly delighted in the short and quite simple idea of think with your own brains before settling to one particular truth. I think this guideline is pretty universal, and can be applied to philosophy, physics, chemistry or mathematics. There was a reason why they teached us in school how to prove functions instead of just asking us to memorize them. The Bible - and religion - connection was mostly incidential.

    Once more; this post wasn't as much about the Bible as it was about the way of thinking that blind belief in the Bible makes impossible.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I live with a believing person and it's not the point about citing the first source that gave her the information about some topic. She believes this source is the one and only cosmic truth. These people just don't consider science that advanced for the matter, or even legitimate. I'm not a side here, just pointing out the other side's story.

    As a side comment, TFK does sound angry rather often.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm sorry if I came across as angry, I wasn't. And I don't disagree with you, quite the opposite.

    My point was not about religion or faith or Bibles. Note that in the original Boing Boing post Mrs. Shepherd's denial of evolution was mentioned in the beginning only in passing. Their point was to laugh at how it didn't even occur to her to ask if the world is flat (and one comment wonders about the kind of sheltered life she must have lead to be oblivious to any mention of our planet).

    This kind of human-centrism prevails pretty much everywhere. And that was my point. (And that does, actually, irritate me to some degree.)

    ReplyDelete