Religion. The root of all evil?

[Andy Bennett]

Not my question, you'll all be surprised to know. It's actually posed by Professor Richard Dawkins, Fellow of the Royal Society, (FRS), and one smart dude by any definition.

http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/C/can_you_believe_it/debates/rootofevil.html

He makes one interesting point... that in a world without religion bad people would do bad things and good people would do good things. Generally speaking you need a religious world to ensure that good people do bad things.

[Yankee_Blue]

Not my question, you'll all be surprised to know. It's actually posed by Professor Richard Dawkins, Fellow of the Royal Society, (FRS), and one smart dude by any definition.

http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/C/can_you_believe_it/debates/rootofevil.html

He makes one interesting point... that in a world without religion bad people would do bad things and good people would do good things. Generally speaking you need a religious world to ensure that good people do bad things.


Can I please have the ten minutes back that I spent reading that?

[ratdog]

Generally speaking you need a religious world to ensure that good people do bad things.

Dear Dick,

You need religion to make good people bad? Oh really?

Love,

Joe Stalin

[afgrijselijkheid]

i watched this last night and it was pretty good... then again, there isn't much of a way to reason against faith (which can be a good thing and a bad thing at different times)

[sarabella]

The thing that amazed me is that some people actually believe that people would have no moral compass if it weren't for religion.

In theory, I believe with religion. Or, I believe in some of it's teachings - be a good person, etc. etc. But I don't think I'd believe anything different had I not been exposed to religion years ago. I don't need a book to tell me not to murder or steal, or even not to be good to people around me. It's just the way I've chosen to live my life.

The point of the show wasn't to say that religion makes good people bad, btw. It makes an interesting argument, but the show was more about how people can believe something even though there's mountains of evidence to disprove most of it.

[Pilum]

Not my question, you'll all be surprised to know. It's actually posed by Professor Richard Dawkins, Fellow of the Royal Society, (FRS), and one smart dude by any definition.

I disagree. The pursuit of power is the root of all evil; religion, ethnicity, whether you vote for the puppet on the left or the puppet on the right - these are all simply tools the power-seeker will use to grab and maintain his/her hold on the levers.

In any case, I've long been a bit suspicious of Dawkins; while his books are generally very good, I do wish he'd stop harping on about religion. He's so very.... pious :) about not following a faith. It's almost like he's trying too hard...

(scene at a party)
"Ah, James, have you met...?"
"Hello, you must be Dr Whittaker. I'm Professor Dawkins, and I don't believe in your non-existent God!"
"Erm, that's nice, so what do you..."
"Don't you try to oppress me with your outmoded belief systems!"
"I wasn't..."
"I spit on your emotional crutch! THERE IS NO GOD!!!!!"
"....... riiiiiiiight. Vol-au-vent, Professor?"
"A prawn one, please. Want to see me wipe my backside on the Talmud?" :D

[Andy Bennett]

Dear Dick,

You need religion to make good people bad? Oh really?

Love,

Joe Stalin
What?

[Andy Bennett]

The point of the show wasn't to say that religion makes good people bad, btw.
That's why I didn't say that.

[Andy Bennett]

I disagree. The pursuit of power is the root of all evil;

Thus the question mark, I would imagine. Presumably it's meant to be a provocative statement to attract debate.

I don't think you're right that he's overreacting to religion, though, in the current climate it's one of the few things which are truly dangerous.

[AFCA]

Greed is the root of all evil.

I believe religion becomes dangerous only when people forget that they are not to judge others or infringe their religious beliefs and/or customs upon others.

[Chicago1871]

Religion is not the root of all evil. Evil would exist without religion, religion only gives us a definition, and different religions can provide different definitions. This does beg the question though, can good exist without evil or evil without good? How does one define an action without considering it's opposite?

Whoa, dude. [/Keanu]

[Chicago1871]

Greed is the root of all evil.
This is correct, to a degree. The most basic human need is self preservation, and based on our understanding of the world, it's unlikely that our basic needs of self preservation conflict so much with others that evil would be a result. However, from early man to the humans of today, people want more. It is the desire for more than one's own needs that is the root of all evil. This however, does not mean that desire is a bad thing.

[AFCA]

Religion is not the root of all evil. Evil would exist without religion, religion only gives us a definition, and different religions can provide different definitions. This does beg the question though, can good exist without evil or evil without good? How does one define an action without considering it's opposite?


Good and evil only exist in our mind... morality, ethics... means to help people interact socially.

Extreme individualism hurts us all, the way I see it. In the modern world we have the tools to really make things work. It's this individuality thing that keeps us from using them and looking beyond our own needs. Fear, distrust and conflict are the natural result of this attitude.

Nobody's perfect, but it's a shame to see how people really don't care or believe in a 'better way'. I do to some extent, but my world view has become very negative. I'm quite close to the point of not caring anymore.

[DJPoopypants]

For all of attitudes on organized religion (probably "bashing" to some) - I think people should recognize the positive contributions of religion as well.

Religions can surely be seen as powerful vectors for the implementation of beliefs. Saying "do x, or else bad thing y will happen to you" is undoubtably a powerful tool.

So as far as religions espouse compassionate ideas, they do wonderful things. Give to the poor, for example. the amount of donations and charitable works done throughout history is immeasurable, and certainly has bettered the lives of countless people.

When religions espouse punitive ideas, well, the "evils" done are also immeasurable.

The problem wopuld not be religion. Religion is essentially in scientific terms, a vector. It pushes forward behaviors.

When religious leaders are good - or when religious leaders are bad - well, that's like arguing whether a gun is good or bad. It is a powerful tool. When used by humans, with human failings....results are mixed.

Without religion - well, I guess that's for the Nietzhe thread.

[bigredfutbol]

Greed is the root of all evil.

I don't believe that for a second. What 'greed' motivates a sadist?

I believe religion becomes dangerous only when people forget that they are not to judge others or infringe their religious beliefs and/or customs upon others.

The problem with this is that it's very, very hard to be a sincere believer in ANYTHING without assuming that nonbelievers are wrong. Tolerance is a great thing, but how do you balance it with the certain belief that you are following the One True Way?

[Norsk Troll]

I believe religion becomes dangerous only when people forget that they are not to judge others or infringe their religious beliefs and/or customs upon others.Meaning ... all the time.




Religions can surely be seen as powerful vectors for the implementation of beliefs. Saying "do x, or else bad thing y will happen to you" is undoubtably a powerful tool. That's why societies have laws. At least those redress the malfeasance within the perpetrator's own life-time.

[christopher d]

The problem with this is that it's very, very hard to be a sincere believer in ANYTHING without assuming that nonbelievers are wrong. Tolerance is a great thing, but how do you balance it with the certain belief that you are following the One True Way?
I am convinced, beyond a shadow of a doubt that Soccer is the best sport ever invented. The elegance of twenty-two men and one ball, which belies days of strategic planning, and minute by minute changes in strategy. The spectacle of scoring a goal -- unmatched in any other sport, and the true universiality of the only sport that can be called "The World's game". Let me posit, based on the above, that I am a sincere believer in the superiority of soccer above all other sports.

My mother is a baseball fan. She enjoys the complexity of the sport and its strategies; the myriad of statistics that play a real part in the game's outcome. She enjoys the one-on-one duel of every at-bat, and the fact that if a batter succeeds only 1/3rd of the time, he's doing quite well for himself. She enjoys the history (being a Yankees fan, it's tough not to ;) ), and the ability to directly compare, through statistics, the best players in every era with each other. Every other sport to her is just that -- some other sport. Including soccer.

Do I think she's wrong? No. To her, it makes sense that Baseball is the best game ever invented.

I could also do this with religion. Those who follow Religions of the Book subscribe to a religion that worships a Creator, I subscribe to one that worships Creation, while honoring the Creatrix. I could give a rat's ass about how all of this stuff was made, I just know that it was and it's beautiful. And central to my belief system is that everyone on Earth has the right to find their own way spiritually, and that it is my duty not to interfere with that process. Which puts me in a bad place with evangelicals, right? Nope. THat's their way... and they should follow it. It's actually not that difficult a task. Rather than "critical thinking", perhaps it could be called "critical belief" -- the ability to hold more than one belief in one's head at a time, accept that both are true to those who believe them (which is all that's really necessary), and maintain one's own belief system.

[#10 Jersey]

The thing that amazed me is that some people actually believe that people would have no moral compass if it weren't for religion.

In theory, I believe with religion. Or, I believe in some of it's teachings - be a good person, etc. etc. But I don't think I'd believe anything different had I not been exposed to religion years ago. I don't need a book to tell me not to murder or steal, or even not to be good to people around me. It's just the way I've chosen to live my life.

The point of the show wasn't to say that religion makes good people bad, btw. It makes an interesting argument, but the show was more about how people can believe something even though there's mountains of evidence to disprove most of it.

How do you know you don't need religion to know that murder or stealing are bad?

Assuming your ancestors were religious to some degree, how do you know that their morals/values etc didn't help create what you are today..the person that knows "intuitively" that stealing and murder are wrong.

[#10 Jersey]

I don't believe that for a second. What 'greed' motivates a sadist?



The problem with this is that it's very, very hard to be a sincere believer in ANYTHING without assuming that nonbelievers are wrong. Tolerance is a great thing, but how do you balance it with the certain belief that you are following the One True Way?

Certainly there are many "religious" people that feel that they have the one true way. But I think you might be painting with a broad brush. I can tell you that most in Judaism do not feel there is a One True Way.

[frenil]

I don't believe that for a second. What 'greed' motivates a sadist?


personal pleasure?