Religion As A Virus Of The Mind

[Douger]

Religion As A Virus Of The Mind: I didn't know Dawkins used this analogy. I am impressed with the succinctness of the analogy as I admire and agree with it's simple profoundness of meaning: "Religions are viruses of the mind."

---

here we have an interesting contextual discussion of...

Memes are habits, skills, songs, stories, or any other kind of information that is copied from person to person. Memes, like genes, are replicators...Large groups of memes that are copied and passed on together are called co-adapted meme complexes, or memeplexes.
---



Some memes are almost entirely exploitative, or viral, in nature, including chain letters and e-mail viruses. These consist of a “copy-me” instruction backed up with threats and promises. Religions have a similar structure and this is why Dawkins refers to them as ‘viruses of the mind’.

Many religions threaten hell and damnation, promise heaven or salvation, and insist that their followers pass on their beliefs to others. This ensures the survival of the memeplex. Other viral memes include alternative therapies that don’t work, and new age fads and cults.

Relatively harmless memes include children’s games, urban legends and popular songs, all of which can spread like infections.

http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/memetics/about memes.htm

----------------------------------
​

That virus is acquired by people who keep their heads up their asses.

 

[Peach]

I might not be qualified to teach history, mostly because I only get into it when I come across a personal account, but I am qualified to debate you about it and what actually happened. My point here is that, by not reading, you limit yourself. In other words, I am not harping on the professor, I am pointing out that you do not know what you are talking about. You can't.

Go take his course, read the material he assigns, and pass the course, and we can talk. Until then, you are the one that isn't qualified to discuss this.

It's a message board. I'm not turning in my doctorite paper here. You still have offered no places where I was in error. You still just want me to tell you that you are smarter than I with no proof other than your assumtion it is so. OK. Discussion with you is pointless. Have a nice day.

I did offer places you were in error, I even went to the trouble of tracking down the alleged definition you used to prove it. You keep assuming that there is no difference between a theologian and the caricature of a preacher you find in a movie. You, quite literally, do not know what you are talking about. Theologians actually deal with the real world, not the one you imagine they want to exist. They wonder how to incorporate the fact of evolution with the reality of God. Just because you prefer to think that all Christians are idiots does not mean we are. Take some time to actually read some of the stuff we actually think about, and discuss, so you don't come across as a total idiot. It is always easier to look only at the things that validate your beliefs than actually learn something. By not learning what Christians actually talk about you are just perpetuating the problem.

The Theological Dilemma of Evolution, Part 1 | BioLogos

And love cannot be proven by scientific method, nor empirical data; thus it too is a "virus".....SIMPLE, as the one right wing Conservative atheist I know termed it......... "I'm atheist, I believe in the big bang theory".

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Religion As A Virus Of The Mind: I didn't know Dawkins used this analogy. I am impressed with the succinctness of the analogy as I admire and agree with it's simple profoundness of meaning: "Religions are viruses of the mind."

---

here we have an interesting contextual discussion of...

Memes are habits, skills, songs, stories, or any other kind of information that is copied from person to person. Memes, like genes, are replicators...Large groups of memes that are copied and passed on together are called co-adapted meme complexes, or memeplexes.
---



Some memes are almost entirely exploitative, or viral, in nature, including chain letters and e-mail viruses. These consist of a “copy-me” instruction backed up with threats and promises. Religions have a similar structure and this is why Dawkins refers to them as ‘viruses of the mind’.

Many religions threaten hell and damnation, promise heaven or salvation, and insist that their followers pass on their beliefs to others. This ensures the survival of the memeplex. Other viral memes include alternative therapies that don’t work, and new age fads and cults.

Relatively harmless memes include children’s games, urban legends and popular songs, all of which can spread like infections.

about memes

----------------------------------
​

That virus is acquired by people who keep their heads up their asses.

Not always, but mostly.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Look in a mirror idiot.

pucker up

and

kiss my lily white ass.

Save it for your boyfriend.

but you are my new boyfriend. everyone here sees it. either that or you stalk perfect strangers

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I have read multiple books about history, and understand it on a level you can't get from a lecture. It is wonderful to get facts, but unless you read journals and find out why people did things all you get is what the professor wants you to know.

that explains it.

what professors do you know? jesus, most professors want people to think for themselves.

 

[hipeter924]

Personality doesn't change when you pick up religion or lose it, which explains how people can go from raving fundamentalist, to raving atheist with ease.

When I lost religion, for a moment I was sick of religious people and their belief systems. Then I just realized after surfing the net that Atheists aren't 'better' than religious people, they are the same people, with the same flaws, just without god.

I don't agree with the Dawkins crowd, putting billboards up and upsetting people isn't going to create understanding. Lastly insults and nasty words aren't an argument, but ways to sell books; which is also why Ann Coulter's books sell so well. I wouldn't call Dawkins the Ann Coulter of the non-religious, but he crosses the line of decency once and in while.

 

[Peach]

I have personally known quite a few agnostics, but a died in the wool atheist is hard to reason with. Many appear to adopt the stand that no BELIEFS in a power greater than humans makes them "intellectual". IT DOESN'T.
********************************************
God reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists.
Einstein

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Personality doesn't change when you pick up religion or lose it, which explains how people can go from raving fundamentalist, to raving atheist with ease.

When I lost religion, for a moment I was sick of religious people and their belief systems. Then I just realized after surfing the net that Atheists aren't 'better' than religious people, they are the same people, with the same flaws, just without god.

I don't agree with the Dawkins crowd, putting billboards up and upsetting people isn't going to create understanding. Lastly insults and nasty words aren't an argument, but ways to sell books; which is also why Ann Coulter's books sell so well. I wouldn't call Dawkins the Ann Coulter of the non-religious, but he crosses the line of decency once and in while.

I agree on the confrontation, but who can blame some of the Atheists? They get bombarded with messages telling them they suck, they are evil and they will burn in hell because they refuse to be saved. and this unsolicited.

I'm just a little unbeliever, who believes the psyche is a special place where myth and symbols reside. Nothing supernatural about that to defend or deny

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I have personally known quite a few agnostics, but a died in the wool atheist is hard to reason with. Many appear to adopt the stand that no BELIEFS in a power greater than humans makes them "intellectual". IT DOESN'T.
********************************************
God reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists.
Einstein

Insisting that others base all argument on the premise that your god exists is disrespectful and ignorant.

I have no idea why you feel inferior to Atheists (witness your mention of what they think), but it is unattractive and painful to publicly witness your imbecilities.

 

[Peach]

I have personally known quite a few agnostics, but a died in the wool atheist is hard to reason with. Many appear to adopt the stand that no BELIEFS in a power greater than humans makes them "intellectual". IT DOESN'T.
********************************************
God reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists.
Einstein

Insisting that others base all argument on the premise that your god exists is disrespectful and ignorant.

I have no idea why you feel inferior to Atheists (witness your mention of what they think), but it is unattractive and painful to publicly witness your imbecilities.

THAT is an argument against RELIGION; but the belief in a power greater than humans that is beyond human comprehension is not ignorant. Rather, the egocentric idea that the universe is just there, and life an accident, is just that: a result of HUMAN EGO. As my father would say "I believe in a supreme being honey, its organized religions that have created so many problems.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I have personally known quite a few agnostics, but a died in the wool atheist is hard to reason with. Many appear to adopt the stand that no BELIEFS in a power greater than humans makes them "intellectual". IT DOESN'T.
********************************************
God reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists.
Einstein

Insisting that others base all argument on the premise that your god exists is disrespectful and ignorant.

I have no idea why you feel inferior to Atheists (witness your mention of what they think), but it is unattractive and painful to publicly witness your imbecilities.

THAT is an argument against RELIGION; but the belief in a power greater than humans that is beyond human comprehension is not ignorant. Rather, the egocentric idea that the universe is just there, and life an accident, is just that: a result of HUMAN EGO. As my father would say "I believe in a supreme being honey, its organized religions that have created so many problems.

The belief itself is not ignorant. What is ignorant is insisting others meet you there. You cannot have an intelligent conversation with a religious person who isn't schooled in comparative religion.

Man is egocentric. No big deal. How man deals with the eccentricity is key.

 

[Peach]

Insisting that others base all argument on the premise that your god exists is disrespectful and ignorant.

I have no idea why you feel inferior to Atheists (witness your mention of what they think), but it is unattractive and painful to publicly witness your imbecilities.

THAT is an argument against RELIGION; but the belief in a power greater than humans that is beyond human comprehension is not ignorant. Rather, the egocentric idea that the universe is just there, and life an accident, is just that: a result of HUMAN EGO. As my father would say "I believe in a supreme being honey, its organized religions that have created so many problems.

The belief itself is not ignorant. What is ignorant is insisting others meet you there. You cannot have an intelligent conversation with a religious person who isn't schooled in comparative religion.

Man is egocentric. No big deal. How man deals with the eccentricity is key.

What is ignorant is insisting others meet you there. You cannot have an intelligent conversation with a religious person who isn't schooled in comparative religion.
*********************************************
I know a bit about comparative beliefs as I usually term them. I do not insist the world meet my beliefs; and I can be quite critical of religion. Still, an absolute "THERE IS NO HIGHER POWER" seems a religion also.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

THAT is an argument against RELIGION; but the belief in a power greater than humans that is beyond human comprehension is not ignorant. Rather, the egocentric idea that the universe is just there, and life an accident, is just that: a result of HUMAN EGO. As my father would say "I believe in a supreme being honey, its organized religions that have created so many problems.

The belief itself is not ignorant. What is ignorant is insisting others meet you there. You cannot have an intelligent conversation with a religious person who isn't schooled in comparative religion.

Man is egocentric. No big deal. How man deals with the eccentricity is key.

What is ignorant is insisting others meet you there. You cannot have an intelligent conversation with a religious person who isn't schooled in comparative religion.
*********************************************
I know a bit about comparative beliefs as I usually term them. I do not insist the world meet my beliefs; and I can be quite critical of religion. Still, an absolute "THERE IS NO HIGHER POWER" seems a religion also.

there seems to be a religion of Atheism with some people. But if one doesn't believe in the supernatural, there cannot be a higher power as in a creator, or force with intelligence. The naturalists have the upper hand from where I see it. They do not have to prove a higher power doesn't exist to win an argument.

 

[Peach]

The belief itself is not ignorant. What is ignorant is insisting others meet you there. You cannot have an intelligent conversation with a religious person who isn't schooled in comparative religion.

Man is egocentric. No big deal. How man deals with the eccentricity is key.

What is ignorant is insisting others meet you there. You cannot have an intelligent conversation with a religious person who isn't schooled in comparative religion.
*********************************************
I know a bit about comparative beliefs as I usually term them. I do not insist the world meet my beliefs; and I can be quite critical of religion. Still, an absolute "THERE IS NO HIGHER POWER" seems a religion also.

there seems to be a religion of Atheism with some people. But if one doesn't believe in the supernatural, there cannot be a higher power as in a creator, or force with intelligence. The naturalists have the upper hand from where I see it. They do not have to prove a higher power doesn't exist to win an argument.

I think it more responsible to leave the question OPEN. I grew up in area wherein I heard "Catholics can become Christians" "The Jews are _______ " "Them Muslims just wanna _________" more than enough to last my lifetime. "My" God as you phrase it, has no rigid dogma that must be adhered to.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

What is ignorant is insisting others meet you there. You cannot have an intelligent conversation with a religious person who isn't schooled in comparative religion.
*********************************************
I know a bit about comparative beliefs as I usually term them. I do not insist the world meet my beliefs; and I can be quite critical of religion. Still, an absolute "THERE IS NO HIGHER POWER" seems a religion also.

there seems to be a religion of Atheism with some people. But if one doesn't believe in the supernatural, there cannot be a higher power as in a creator, or force with intelligence. The naturalists have the upper hand from where I see it. They do not have to prove a higher power doesn't exist to win an argument.

I think it more responsible to leave the question OPEN. I grew up in area wherein I heard "Catholics can become Christians" "The Jews are _______ " "Them Muslims just wanna _________" more than enough to last my lifetime. "My" God as you phrase it, has no rigid dogma that must be adhered to.

to leave the question open is still to ask others to believe the supernatural exists. myself, I find it difficult to conceive of a force with consciousness, outside of humanity, that has concerns with humanity.

 

[Peach]

there seems to be a religion of Atheism with some people. But if one doesn't believe in the supernatural, there cannot be a higher power as in a creator, or force with intelligence. The naturalists have the upper hand from where I see it. They do not have to prove a higher power doesn't exist to win an argument.

I think it more responsible to leave the question OPEN. I grew up in area wherein I heard "Catholics can become Christians" "The Jews are _______ " "Them Muslims just wanna _________" more than enough to last my lifetime. "My" God as you phrase it, has no rigid dogma that must be adhered to.

to leave the question open is still to ask others to believe the supernatural exists. myself, I find it difficult to conceive of a force with consciousness, outside of humanity, that has concerns with humanity.

I can accept that humans cannot understand all things. Supernatural seems to indicate psychics, and clairvoyants. In the end however, I defer to the beliefs of others. Each has the liberty to decide their own. That includes hard core right wing atheists.....................................( No, I am not referring to you.)

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I think it more responsible to leave the question OPEN.

...

to leave the question open is still to ask others to believe the supernatural exists. myself, I find it difficult to conceive of a force with consciousness, outside of humanity, that has concerns with humanity.

I can accept that humans cannot understand all things. Supernatural seems to indicate psychics, and clairvoyants. In the end however, I defer to the beliefs of others. Each has the liberty to decide their own. That includes hard core right wing atheists.....................................( No, I am not referring to you.)

Religion people and people of faith are more like psychics, and clairvoyants than hey care to admit.

I used to chase christian mysticism. I almost joined an orthodox or Catholic order in my late 20s. I studied the early church fathers. I understand spiritual people. I just awoke to the realization that eternity is a human construct and of the mind. Consciousness is a wonderful thing, and needs no supernatural explanations.

see? a non-believer with a spiritual/mythical/mystical side.

 

[The Professor]

The term Religion is too broad, it encompasses too large a vareity of philosophies.

But, that being said, most do prey on the instinctual primortal fears that have been with man since the caveman days:

Fear of Death
Fear of Thunder
Fear of Fire
Fear of th Future
Fear of predators

I mean imagine being a semi-dumb animal living in a cave. You'd be scared shitless of everything.

I guess that explains why so many conservatives are Religious.

Fear of Death: Existentialism

Existentialism: fear of death? Are you serious?

I don't know how you could make such a blunder. At first I thought you merely got confused between existentialism (a philosophy) and existential fear (an indefinite and uncontrollable dread) . The two words may sound similar but they do not mean the same thing. However, the more I thought about it, the more I became convinced that you really don't know what existentialism is, so I will try to explain. Unfortunately, there is no single definition of existentialism, just as there is no definition of Christianity which defines all those who call themselves Christians. However, I have taken the time to find I few links I think will enlighten you.

“The early 19th century philosopher Søren Kierkegaard is widely regarded as the father of existentialism. He maintained that the individual is solely responsible for giving his or her own life meaning and for living that life passionately and sincerely, in spite of many existential obstacles and distractions including despair, angst, absurdity, alienation, and boredom. Subsequent existentialist philosophers retain the emphasis on the individual, but differ, in varying degrees, on how one achieves and what constitutes a fulfilling life, what obstacles must be overcome, and what external and internal factors are involved, including the potential consequences of the existence or non-existence of God.” Here's the link:

Existentialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“Existentialism is a philosophical way of thinking that is very different from other philosophical ideas. Many religions and philosophies (ways of thinking about the world) say that human life has a meaning (or a purpose). But people who believe in existentialism think that the world and human life have no meaning unless people give them meanings: 'existence precedes (is before) essence'.

“Existentialists believe that our human essence or nature (way of being in the world) is entirely and simply existence (being in the world). This means that the only nature we as humans have is the nature we make for ourselves. As a result of this existentialists think that the actions or choices that a person makes are very important. They believe that every person has to decide for themselves what is right and wrong, and what is good and bad.

“People who believe in existentialism ask questions like 'what is it like to be a human (a person) in the world?' and 'how can we understand human freedom (what it means for a person to be free)?' Existentialism is very often connected with negative emotions, such as anxiety (worrying), dread (a very strong fear), and mortality (awareness of our own death).

“Existentialism is different from Nihilism. Nihilists believe that human life does not have a meaning (or a purpose) at all.” Here's the link:

Existentialism - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now that you know what existentialism is, I will attempt to show you that existentialists do not see death as something bad or to be feared Instead they encourage everyone to live their lives to the limit even though they might fear death. Again, here a few links:

“To the existentialist, it is important that we be aware of death. The existentialist does not view death negatively but holds that awareness of death as a basic human condition gives significance to living.” Here's the link:

Key Concepts of Existentialism

“Christians are quite unabashed in teaching that their religion is the only one that has the 'answer' to death. Indeed, they generally trumpet it as an unrivaled advantage of their system. But if the existentialists are right, this is a Pyrrhic victory, because death is not a problem; it is the very key to truly living life. Awareness of our finitude, Yalom argues, is absolutely critical to our full appreciation of and immersion in life. An awareness of death actually saves us. How? Because knowing that we will one day die injects an intensity, and poignancy, a sweetness, and even an urgency into life that cannot be had any other way. It makes us realize that we must live now, that life cannot be indefinitely postponed. It makes us realize that life must be appreciated now, tasted in its fullness and drunk deeply of now, because it may not last. Awareness of death makes plain what is truly important in life, and what is not; in Yalom’s phrase, it 'trivializes the trivial.' And it can embolden us by teaching us that we can face our worst fears and emerge strengthened.” Check out this link for more:

Existentialism: Death and Isolation « de-conversion

I am certain that thanatology (look it up) is not your strong suit, but you should know that the fear of death is rather universal. Existentialists are taught to overcome this fear and not let it affect how they live their lives. I think, sir, that you are lacking in critical thinking skills...wait; that's what you accused me of when you gave me a negative rep. But don't worry, when I have a problem with you, I will deal with you publicly as I am right now. Karma's a bitch, ain't it?

PS: You are in no way qualified to belittle the intelligence of others.

 

[Peach]

to leave the question open is still to ask others to believe the supernatural exists. myself, I find it difficult to conceive of a force with consciousness, outside of humanity, that has concerns with humanity.

I can accept that humans cannot understand all things. Supernatural seems to indicate psychics, and clairvoyants. In the end however, I defer to the beliefs of others. Each has the liberty to decide their own. That includes hard core right wing atheists.....................................( No, I am not referring to you.)

Religion people and people of faith are more like psychics, and clairvoyants than hey care to admit.

I used to chase christian mysticism. I almost joined an orthodox or Catholic order in my late 20s. I studied the early church fathers. I understand spiritual people. I just awoke to the realization that eternity is a human construct and of the mind. Consciousness is a wonderful thing, and needs no supernatural explanations.

see? a non-believer with a spiritual/mythical/mystical side.

Well, good to see you kept YOUR mind open for a time. Sancto from PENNSYLVANIA has yet to accomplish that task. I bet he is increasing nausea across the US though, every time I read most of his "statements" I wanna throw up as he does when he hears "SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE".

 

[The Professor]

Memes are supposed to be ideas that evolve through natural selection, with successful ones spreading, and unsuccessful ones dying off. I was trying to determine why a person who wants to pretends that religion is stupid is attempting to rely on a concept that has no basis in science.

Dawkin's ideas are falling to advanced science, yet people still look to him as an expert. He really sin't, and the soomer uninformed proponents of evolution realize it, the better off they will be in the debate.

The Dawkins dogma – New Scientist K21st – Essential 21st Century Knowledge

Ok, sorry but you are not getting what i said. Granted i did not put it in quotes, but it did seem to fit.

I've seen a lot of strange stuff, but I've never seen anything to make me believe there's one all-powerful Force controlling everything. There's no mystical energy field that controls my destiny. It's all a lot of simple tricks and nonsense

~Han Solo, starwars

Actually, I got you. I apologize for the tangent, but Dante neg repped me in an attempt to make me back down from attacking Dawkins while I was responding to you. I let my irritation with him spill over into my reply to you. My apologies.

It was appropriate and funny.

Don't feel bad; he neg repped me too. He accused me of lacking critical thinking skills. Actually, I wish for my sake that I knew ten percent of what he thinks he knows, and I wish for his sake that he knew ten percent of what I actually know. Were it so, we would both be greatly enriched thereby. I have given quite a few reps, but never a bad one. I think it is better to deal with disagreements publicly; however, I can understand how someone who is vindictive and lacking in debating skills would opt for a neg rep instead.

Thanks for listening. I feel so much better now.