Religion: It's All In Your Head

[Samson]

I think it would be best to let the author respond.

Answering for the author is my coping mechanism.

The rest of us call it arrogant.

Happily, the opinion of you and your imaginary peanut gallary is irrelevant.

 

[Samson]

Oh wow. Another attempt to explain why people of faith are idiots. What a shocking surprise.

Did you get that from the article?

I didn't.

I thought it justified religion as a normal, natural, and very effective reaction to stress.

Like masturbation is for Curvelight.

 

[CurveLight]

Oh wow. Another attempt to explain why people of faith are idiots. What a shocking surprise.

Did you get that from the article?

I didn't.

I thought it justified religion as a normal, natural, and very effective reaction to stress.

Like masturbation is for Curvelight.

Openly fantasizing about guys is probably why you cannot debate politics.

 

[Samson]

Oh wow. Another attempt to explain why people of faith are idiots. What a shocking surprise.

Did you get that from the article?

I didn't.

I thought it justified religion as a normal, natural, and very effective reaction to stress.

Like masturbation is for Curvelight.

Openly fantasizing about guys is probably why you cannot debate politics.

No, its fear of rapier-wits like you and Truthmatters.

Moronophobia.

 

[CurveLight]

Did you get that from the article?

I didn't.

I thought it justified religion as a normal, natural, and very effective reaction to stress.

Like masturbation is for Curvelight.

Openly fantasizing about guys is probably why you cannot debate politics.

No, its fear of rapier-wits like you and Truthmatters.

Moronophobia.

If you are intellectually paralyzed out of fear by a dummass like me then you really are beyond help. Stick to your fantasies...at least there you can control everyone...

 

[Samson]

Openly fantasizing about guys is probably why you cannot debate politics.

No, its fear of rapier-wits like you and Truthmatters.

Moronophobia.

If you are intellectually paralyzed out of fear by a dummass like me then you really are beyond help. Stick to your fantasies...at least there you can control everyone...

Now, you're just making it too easy.

 

[Sofus]

I found it interesting as I have always thought that religion was nothing but a mental construct designed as a psychological coping mechanism

qft

The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.

One does not need to assume, one just needs to observe.

 

[CurveLight]

qft

The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.

One does not need to assume, one just needs to observe.

The premise assumes there is something wrong with people who have faith. You're making the same claim but try to hide it by claiming observation. It's like saying anyone who watches a space shuttle launch must work for NASA.

 

[uscitizen]

The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.

One does not need to assume, one just needs to observe.

The premise assumes there is something wrong with people who have faith. You're making the same claim but try to hide it by claiming observation. It's like saying anyone who watches a space shuttle launch must work for NASA.

that does not compute.
abend 999

 

[Samson]

The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.

One does not need to assume, one just needs to observe.

The premise assumes there is something wrong with people who have faith. You're making the same claim but try to hide it by claiming observation. It's like saying anyone who watches a space shuttle launch must work for NASA.

Where does it say in the premise that there is "something wrong with people who have faith?"

 

[Kalam]

"Nor is it possible to undo the spiritual value of the mystic state by by specifying the organic conditions which appear to determine it"

And


"The truth is that the organic causation of our mental states..."

Why, in your opinion, do these statements necessarily point toward belief in mind-body dualism? The point of Iqbal's statements is that connecting spiritual experiences to certain chemical processes in the brain does nothing to undermine the legitimacy of those experiences.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The main problem is assuming a "coping" mechanism is needed or that religion fulfills such a need.

Why?

The "problem" is not coping.

I think it would be best to let the author respond.

Religion and the belief in deities resulted from fear.

Fear of the unknown. To cope with that fear people had to find a way to define then control what was making them fearful.

Gods were then invented as a mental construct and appeasing gods became the basis for all religions.

It is how we coped with our fear.

 

[CurveLight]

"Nor is it possible to undo the spiritual value of the mystic state by by specifying the organic conditions which appear to determine it"

And


"The truth is that the organic causation of our mental states..."

Why, in your opinion, do these statements necessarily point toward belief in mind-body dualism? The point of Iqbal's statements is that connecting spiritual experiences to certain chemical processes in the brain does nothing to undermine the legitimacy of those experiences.

Dualism is the belief that both physical and immaterial coexist and he argues from that perspective while trying to conclude on idealism.

 

[CurveLight]

Why?

The "problem" is not coping.

I think it would be best to let the author respond.

Religion and the belief in deities resulted from fear.

Fear of the unknown. To cope with that fear people had to find a way to define then control what was making them fearful.

Gods were then invented as a mental construct and appeasing gods became the basis for all religions.

It is how we coped with our fear.

Going back to the babylonian myth of origins your point is quite clear but a bit out of context for the op. Your position still assumes there is something wrong with everyone who has faith.

 

[CurveLight]

One does not need to assume, one just needs to observe.

The premise assumes there is something wrong with people who have faith. You're making the same claim but try to hide it by claiming observation. It's like saying anyone who watches a space shuttle launch must work for NASA.

Where does it say in the premise that there is "something wrong with people who have faith?"

If a "coping mechanism" is needed, especially out of fear........

 

[editec]

Religion: It's All In Your Head

Existence itself...it is all in your head.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I think it would be best to let the author respond.

Religion and the belief in deities resulted from fear.

Fear of the unknown. To cope with that fear people had to find a way to define then control what was making them fearful.

Gods were then invented as a mental construct and appeasing gods became the basis for all religions.

It is how we coped with our fear.

Going back to the babylonian myth of origins your point is quite clear but a bit out of context for the op. Your position still assumes there is something wrong with everyone who has faith.

No it doesn't.

I never said there was anything wrong with the coping mechanism of religion did I?

And do you deny that people lived in fear of the unknown in our history.

Anthropologically people of all cultures all over the world developed religions and belief in gods to explain what they could not understand and to assuage their fears. We are wired for such thinking.

 

[Care4all]

so, some of us are "programed to receive"? Or this is just a normal response to something that feels right, ones environment?

 

[CurveLight]

Religion and the belief in deities resulted from fear.

Fear of the unknown. To cope with that fear people had to find a way to define then control what was making them fearful.

Gods were then invented as a mental construct and appeasing gods became the basis for all religions.

It is how we coped with our fear.

Going back to the babylonian myth of origins your point is quite clear but a bit out of context for the op. Your position still assumes there is something wrong with everyone who has faith.

No it doesn't.

I never said there was anything wrong with the coping mechanism of religion did I?

And do you deny that people lived in fear of the unknown in our history.

Anthropologically people of all cultures all over the world developed religions and belief in gods to explain what they could not understand and to assuage their fears. We are wired for such thinking.

Your judgment on the coping mechanism is irrelevant because it doesn't matter if you have a positive, negative, or neutral view. That does not remove the inherent property there is something wrong with people who participate in religion. If someone needs a coping mechanism that means she needs a crutch to help carry what she cannot handle on her own.


Why ask if I deny people lived in fear after I said:

"Going back to the babylonian myth of origins your point is quite clear but a bit out of context for the op."

That affirmed your point about fear of the unknown being a driving force. However, it does not address the op article and specifically the flaw in trying to make the social and personal experiences interchangeable.

 

[Samson]

The premise assumes there is something wrong with people who have faith. You're making the same claim but try to hide it by claiming observation. It's like saying anyone who watches a space shuttle launch must work for NASA.

Where does it say in the premise that there is "something wrong with people who have faith?"

If a "coping mechanism" is needed, especially out of fear........

Yes?

Were you trying to complete a thought before your head exploded?