Religion Never Went Away - It's Just One Part of a Larger Mechanism

in religion •  7 years ago  (edited)

Just a rant with some pseudophilosophical/psychological nonsense thrown in-between to make it appear smart.

I find it humorous every time I hear or read a secular person talk about the ridiculousness of religion. I've started to find it more and more amusing by the day, in fact, while observing society at large.

A lot of people even in my own camp of libertarianism seem to laugh at religion.

And yes, to a secular person - such as myself - the notion of religion can seem ridiculous, but the whole phenomenon needs to be studied beneath the surface.

The naivety of people claiming that religions have gone away due to the advent of science is pretty much as ridiculous as the ancient superstitions these people mock.

Look at this way.

Religions were a massive part of people's lives for centuries. Centuries. All over the world. Religions dictated most everything that went on in society, how people acted, their moral codes, and whatnot.

Religions played such a huge role, in fact, that it's always been clear to me that humans simply have a mechanism in their brains that makes them susceptible to that sort of thinking and reasoning.

The world has changed since the dark ages, but our brains haven't. Whatever mechanism caused religions back in the day are still there.

I seriously doubt religions, in and of themselves, were the one and only manifestation of this mechanism - whatever it may be - so as the world has changed, our brains have simply adapted into their new surroundings.

Cultural evolution is always faster than biological evolution, so our brains are always playing catch up.

Just look at the modern SJW movement. Or leftism in general.

Those movements tick every box of an organized religion, just in a more modern setting. The painful irony is that those in the hip and cool atheist camp on the left are the ones that are the loudest at ridiculing religions. How religions were a form of mind control, turning people into brain dead followers of superstitions.

And then at the same time, they go ahead and claim that there are a thousand different genders.

Why? Because their religion teaches them so.

We can even go deeper.

Equality? Human rights?

Religions. Arbitrary and fake constructs.

Stings a little, doesn't it?

The sting is from the cognitive dissonance in your brain that is struggling right now with the two conflicting notions of religion being bad and concepts such as human rights and equality being good.

No one can "prove" that something like equality is a universal and "true" human right - or if there even is such a thing as human right. These things are never questioned because questioning them takes an immense amount of brain power, and our brains are programmed in such a way that they tend to avoid unnecessary work.

It's just painfully laughable when people talking about how men and women are equal in everything talk about how funny religious people believe in imaginary friends.

I argue that the traditional monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam were just one manifestation of something bigger, it was just adjusted to those times.

And hey, as a libertarian I can fully admit that this takes place in "my camp", too. Libertarianism could be claimed to be my "religion". One that I've been questioning more and more recently, but that's neither here nor there. It's my view on how the world ought to be.

And that's pretty much the deal with any and all ideologies. None of us can prove that the world be a better place under our given ideology. It would our preferred world, but never a universally loved world.

One man's utopia is always another man's dystopia - and vice versa.

I really like the above statement, by the way. I created it completely by accident when writing dialogue for my story Black and Silver. It seems intelligent.

My point here is that religious wars are still happening - even in the increasingly secular West. It's just not My God can whip your God anymore, but instead, it's Anarchy vs. Statism, or Feminism vs. Patriarchy, and whatever the fuck have you.

And just like a Jew and a Muslim will never agree with each other on religion, I don't think we as a species will ever reach a point where one ideology "wins" and everybody just peacefully accepts it.

One ideology/religion may win temporarily, through force, but a revolution will brew under the surface, and will challenge the status quo, and the cycle repeats.

Just like we're programmed to spread our genes, we are also programmed to spread our memes. And that's something we can't escape.

I'd still like to believe - or have faith - in the peaceful voluntaryist revolution, but I'm not too optimistic. Just look at Steemit, which is a voluntaryist experiment. And all we do here is argue. That's who and what we are.

And, basically, that's why there will never be world peace.

Sorry, guys. Heard it here first.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  
  ·  7 years ago (edited)

Yep. When given the opportunity, people will be religious about, well, just about anything. Most are believers by nature, and prefer to believe and adopt opinions rather than think or make up their own models of the world.

This applies to all economic theory in all camps, because economic theory is an unscientific free-for-all where data from the real world have long ceased to influence said theories. I think this is even worse in ancap and libertarian circles than in the more left-wing camp, but that's just me, at least, on Steemit, that's just me.

If I may quote myself:
'I noticed there is a clan of people on Steemit who like to refer to other parts of the general population as "sheep" or "sheeple". This Steemit clan is quite large, and its members all say the exact same things, in unison and total agreement. I find this very confusing, as they behave more like sheep than the general population I am aware of. So I wondered: who are the real sheep?'

I mean, I agree. I consider myself an ancap due to the fact that when observing civilizations that have gone through changes from regulated markets to a free market, and vice versa, it seems to be evident that the free - or at least freer - markets have created more prosperity.

That said, a lot of libertarians themselves are, like you said, sheep, unable to question their own beliefs. And it annoys me because libertarians rarely offer anything intellectually stimulating to me these days.

I've said it before and I'll say it again that a lot of libertarians follow their charismatic leaders just like the collectivists they mock. They repeat catchphrases like taxation is theft without putting thought into what the statement actually means.

It's always good to question your beliefs and realize one's fallibility as a human being.

But being someone who is Finnish, I've seen first hand the problems that socialism and government regulations create.

A free market, by itself, wouldn't offer anything perfect - despite what a lot of ancaps say - since the free market also requires a culture to support it. This is something that a lot of people in all camps seem to be missing.

I always try to underscore the importance of culture in determining human behavior. We never exist in a vacuum.

It's sad, and strange and a few other things, too.

I remember — as about a 7-year old — first having an awareness of what seemed like an "adult" trait; this notion that a person "believing" something was made uncomfortable by the presence of a person who believed something else. Why?

Why? I see it, I understand it, I can cite a bunch of underlying psychological constructs... but few are willing to look at the underlying WHY? Why is it so insufferable that I can respect you (in the global sense) and even like you regardless of what you may believe?

My sense of self and beliefs doesn't feel threatened by the existence of someone else's. And yet? It seems like the vast majority of people's DO. And they can be fundamentalists, liberals, atheists, creationists, scientists... somehow, the presence of an alternative set of beliefs is a threat.

And so, I find myself — reluctantly and sadly — agreeing with you that there may never be world peace.

And then? I often find myself taken to task because "clearly you are not very passionate about your beliefs!" The implication being that since I don't want to somehow "exclude" those not of my belief, I somehow suffer from a character defect.

"What kind of —ist are you, anyway?"

I don't know. Maybe a "Possibilitist?"

Sorry, but of a free-form ramble, there...

Just look at the modern SJW movement. Or leftism in general.

oh boy.

Religion is a very powerful human made tool to control people!
Have a nice weekend :)

What is bad about control if it teaches people how to be free?

Good way of thinking! I prefer to be free without control but yeah there are some people they need that control to be free.

Having freedom implies control. How do you have freedom without it?

  ·  7 years ago (edited)

Dude what are you talking? To have my own freedom I don't need to be controlled this would take my freedom. If you think so then I am sure you are on the wrong platform and you should go back to centralized NSA and CIA controlled platforms like FB an Twitter.

Even this system has controls.

That's a gross oversimplification.

But a true gross oversimplification.

The same can be said about all ideologies. That’s the point of the post. Ragging on religion is so 1990s.

It was shocking and cool when Marilyn Manson did it. Since then, it’s been meh.

There is world peace, we only disagree on what the concept world means.

Libertarianism no longs makes sense to me since I started the arts Qigong and Taijiquan. Libertarianism wants to claim everyone can be an individual and cast shame on the collective without realizing they are part of a collective themselves. No matter how hard they try, they’ll never be separated. 🤣