Will Religion Ever Die?

Do you think there will be a time in human history where we set our religions aside and resort to logic and reasoning?

 

It seems like a loaded question, I take it to imply that all religions are in fact incorrect or at best serve as some sort of emotional crutch.

If I am to assume the question is valid, I think it would have to take an event like contact with intelligent extra-terrestrials or something to make the traditional religions seem outmoded.

The dilemma is that logic can really only cover a narrow spectrum of human experience and it often has to be formulated, which most of us probably find a bit rigid for our direct experience of life and reality. I think that reasoning can carry us further but religious faith still seems like if can be a very powerful thing and perhaps appeals to aspects of certain individuals psyche, particularly when you add group dynamics and a sense of belonging, cause and/or direction to the mix.

 

We should be glad that the people who want to live their life without any religion can do so. It seems it displeases some people that those who want to live life with religion are still doing that. But the values of our western societies mean nothing to me if we can't grant our fellow humans their religious life and what comes with that (a public place to pray or hold services, items that display your religious affiliation like a kippah, headscarf etc. etc.).

As long as religious folks can't tolerate 'infidels' and a-religious folks can't tolerate religious folks (not talking about the dubious actions of some, we don't have to tolerate things that are against our constitutional values and rights of course) or religions in general it is not solely a problem that there are religions, it is how you and me handle the fact that they are there and other people have value and purpose for them.

They are not mutually exclusive. To portray it as such while the majority of religious followers resort to logic and reasoning in their daily life just as much is fairly misleading to the point of sounding disgustingly biased. Maybe if you would specify it more you would make more sense.

 

On average, the world seems to be getting more religious and less rational. Scary.

 

^
How did you reach that conclusion? I'm not sure the world is getting more religious myself (overall it used to be very very religious mind you). My part of the world isn't, and I'm even taking the religious immigrants in account).

There were always irrational people as well (not limited to religions either ). I guess in times of war and (human caused) peril it looks like the world is getting less rational. Overall though... arguable.

 

Interesting article... Here is an excerpt but I think it's worth further reading for the "dual process theory" mentioned.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20141219-will-religion-ever-disappear

It would be interesting if they could poll populations that practice spirituality devoid of religious belief as well.

 

I doubt religion will disappear any time soon. A big part of the problem, or so it seems to me, is that western religions in general really lack much in terms of an actual experiential component. It may be there, but it's deeply buried, and I don't think most Christians for example, are aware to any great degree of the mystical traditions which were once part of that religion. Orthodox Muslims regard Sufi mystical traditions as heretical. That helps the priests, pastors and mullahs stay in control.

That's one reason why in recent decades there has been this big rise in interest in the west in eastern religions like Buddhism and Hinduism. Faith alone is simply no good. Any religion worth much has to offer some kind of experience of something beyond the usual range of consciousness. Or at least that needs to be on the menu. Otherwise religion really is just empty observance. And too often 'faith' simply translates as 'credulity'.

I think religion should definitely take reason as a guide up to a point. But the goal isn't just to arrive by reason at some final big idea or conclusion. Some eastern paths talk about modes of knowledge superior to reason. Thus they tend to be meditative traditions which aim at a personal experience in the here and now,
Just to believe on the basis of a book or what somebody told you is not enough. Belief, like faith is also in the end, inadequate.

Reason is good. But it can only go so far. It may give something for the mind, but little for the heart and body. Faith by itself I think gives even less. Often it's just a kind of emotionalism, and an emotionalism not at peace with itself or the world.

 

fucking church goers cant even read a sign that says "NO PARKING ANYTIME".. I can only imagine how they interpret the bible..

 

I can't stand this notion that reason is void in people that still see value in following an organized religion and are doing so. Well, to be more precise I can't stand it so often being presented as fact, while it is nothing more than a silly generalisation. Sure these unreasonable theists exist, and yes, i took notice of them too.
But whenever someone portrays it as if it's majority of religious folks that are void of any logic and reasoning and the ones without religion are the saviours of the world (while they can be and act just as retarded) it is clear they are not coming from sincere objectivity but from subjective dislike.

 

It's a kind of contradiction I suppose, but to me a lot of the rational (and lets say liberal too) church goers seem more rational than a lot of other people. Maybe too rational even. That's perhaps why we have things like the Archbishop of Canterbury saying he's not really sure if God exists. To me it all seems a bit stuffy and colourless. Others obviously see something else.

Anyway, I wouldn't take it as a sign of irrationality in a person that they go to a church. I would look at how they behave, what their values and ideas are, how I would asses their level of intelligence and education and so on. My guess is that some go because they want something higher than reason, sensation or emotion. A supra-rational truth, and they think it's embodied in Christianity.Maybe they conceive of it in other terms, but something like that. Some go because it's traditional, and that's something with which I can empathize, even if I feel it's not for me.

 

I think it's irrational to go to church unless you just really like being around people in groups.

 

Karen Armstrong argues that logos (reason) and mthos (myth) are two fundamentally different approaches to reality, addressing two different categories of experience. Logos is the analytical faculty we developed for acting practically and effectively in our immediate physical environment.gaining practical knowledge about physical reality, and must therefore be closely in tune and reflect accurately the realities of the world around us. Mythos is about meaning and values, for which the answers of logic and science seem inadequate: coping with our mortality and vulnerability to disease and misfortune, not to mention legitmating the poltical and social order Trouble comes when we try to cross the line and use one approach to the exclusion of the other. This idea is similar to evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould's "two majesteriums" approach to issues of science versus religion. Once on this forum, the so-called Four Horsemen (Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens) grappled on video with the problem of how to respond to the human need to relate to "the numinous". I don't think they came to any conclusion. So from that perspective, the answer to the OP is "Probably not", unless reason and science can somehow find substitute ways of giving us meaning and relating to "the numinous". It is a tenet of Jungian psychology that we can never shed our unconscious non-rational selves, and must acknowledge and accommodate them if we are to be mentally healthy. Religion is a way of doing that.

On the other hand, there's secular Europe. They seem to have muted the role of religion and get along alright. Does that suggest a happy ending resulting from greater modernization? I'm reading Peter Berger et al, Religious America, Secular Europe? Unfortunately, I'm only half way through it, but the answer seems to be no. Europe's secularism is a result of unique historical variables, such as involvement of religion with a class structure and the established official churches that are absent in the U.S. The rise of Christian churches in China and other parts of the Orient suggest that the picture is much more complicated than the ladder to modernity model would suggest.

 

I basically agree with that and the video. My only quibble is that it hints that the oriental versions of spirituality are the mature ones. "Waking up" precisely describes the experience which I and so many other Christians have experienced in a "moment of clarity" involving a sense of oneness with humanity and the universe (only I call it God). We call it a religious experience, and William James has described its wide variety. The dogmatic literal approach in which many believers are stuck seems inadequate to me. If the believer continues to take the doctrines literally. (s)he is sleepwalking.

 

Wilber talks sense here. Nothing with which I'd disagree.

 

I think it will eventually go the way of the old pagan things ( like the Greek gods, the Norse gods,etc) and be viewed as just another of the myths that humanity used to explain things they did not understand.I think most people now know that the Earth is way more than 6,000 years old and that blood doesnt "pay" for "sins",etc. It may take awhile but it happens.

 

I think it's maybe made more explicit in eastern teachings than in a lot of modern Christianity. It would be a very good thing if more Christians saw it in that way though.

 

I'm surprised I didn't consider this, good points.

 

Where in the christian scriptures are there instructions for contemplative practices or an endorsement thereof? I mean a robust programme of empirical self-inquiry. Where does Jesus explain how to do this or its importance?