What societal need does religion fill?

[Skip Intro]

Assuming there is such a thing as a societal need and a solution.

In the broadest sense,

Seems to help us accept the evident fact that we are all on our way to death. It makes that realization ok. Because there is reward. And it stabilizes societies, or societal chaos. It gives a meaning and a purpose.

But in those roles it could be just a tool. Just a means to control. To manipulate.

The existence of a being or beings greater than ourselves,whom we must serve to survive and from whom to seek favor, has been a constant component of our development, the human development.

We evidently need them, our Lords, they must serve a purpose, in a societal sense. Not withstanding their existence or lack there of.

eidted for clarity

[donco6]

1. I disagree.

It actually prevents people from determining a purpose for their lives. It *gives* them a purpose which has been determined by someone else - a purpose that ultimately proves false.

[Mountainman]

4. I agree with you. Imannuel Kant wrote about this.

IMMANUEL KANT

An Answer to the Question: "What is Enlightenment?"

Konigsberg in Prussia, 30th September, 1784.


Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity. Immaturity
is the inability to use one's own understanding without the guidance of another.
This immaturity is self-incurred if its cause is not lack of understanding, but
lack of resolution and courage to use it without the guidance of another. The
motto of enlightenment is therefore: Sapere aude! Have courage to use your own
understanding!

Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large proportion of men, even
when nature has long emancipated them from alien guidance (naturaliter
maiorennes), nevertheless gladly remain immature for life. For the same
reasons, it is all too easy for others to set themselves up as their guardians.
It is so convenient to be immature! If I have a book to have understanding in
place of me, a spiritual adviser to have a conscience for me, a doctor to judge
my diet for me, and so on, I need not make any efforts at all. I need not think,
so long as I can pay; others will soon enough take the tiresome job over for me.
The guardians who have kindly taken upon themselves the work of supervision will
soon see to it that by far the largest part of mankind (including the entire
fair sex) should consider the step forward to maturity not only as difficult but
also as highly dangerous. Having first infatuated their domesticated animals,
and carefully prevented the docile creatures from daring to take a single step
without the leading-strings to which they are tied, they next show them the
danger which threatens them if they try to walk unaided. Now this danger is not
in fact so very great, for they would certainly learn to walk eventually after a
few falls. But an example of this kind is intimidating, and usually frightens
them off from further attempts.

[donco6]

9. Wow, far more eloquent than anything I could say, but

that's exactly my thinking as well. Thanks for the quote.

[Mountainman]

16. I went to a Catholic college and we were not permitted to study Kant

in philosophy class until there was a student faculty revolt. The Church is afraid of those who think for themselves because if we did we would soon learn that we don't need the Church.

[Skip Intro]

8. that is true

religion is huge, and is many things

I'm wondering why its been such a persistent component of our development, as humans.

Mankind, and our societies, have developed a place for religion - and I suspect that religion must exist for a reason, it must fill some need, on a societal level, on a mankind level, because we adhere to it so.

Not arguing that its a good or bad thing. Just speculating on why we seem to neeed it.

[donco6]

12. Read that Kant quote above.

Basically, we're just too damn lazy, and allowing others to think for us is so . . . safe.

[Maple]

2. A sense of community

Ritual. Age markers. Backup. Something to hold on to. A source of strength.

Lots of things.

If you want to eliminate religion...you need something else, that does all these things, to take it's place

[Mountainman]

13. You don't need something else. All you need is within you.

You seem to think that we cannot exist with out that which you say we need from something else. Get rid of religion and we will begin to listen to our inner selves and not to some priest.

[Maple]

15. Ummm maybe you can

many cannot.

So if you want to replace religion, find a substitute, don't just yank the rug out from under people

[donco6]

17. Sadly, that's the point.

There really is no rug. People have been fooled into thinking there's a rug. All we're doing is telling people the rug is a lie. Maybe that feels like "yanking the rug," but I don't see any other way. Substituting one lie for another is . . . well, it just doesn't accomplish much now, does it?

[Maple]

22. The perception of the truth

IS the truth.

And if they need a rug...or a crutch...yanking it away from them won't get you any converts...just hatred.

I don't recall saying anything about lying to anybody.

I don't foist my beliefs on anyone else, and I expect them to show me the same courtesy.

[Mountainman]

25. I'm not looking for converts because if I did I would be no better than

the preist who wants them to depend on him for their spirituality.

Religion is a superstition and not real at all. You don't need any religion. You think you do but you are afraid to try it and that is all up to you. No I don't want converts because what I believe isn't on faith or religion. It is based on me and what comes from inside me.

[Maple]

30. Good thing

because you won't get them this way.

The thread was started by someone who asked about the social need that religion filled. I gave my opinion.

And until you can fill the need for community and ritual, strength and solace that religion gives, you won't have any takers for whatever you're selling.

Telling people that gain comfort and strength from a religious practice, that they are on their own in a dark and indifferent universe is not the best sales pitch I've ever heard. I hope you aren't in marketing.

[Igel]

51. Society doesn't need a religion. Nor a philosophy.

It needs nothing from inside you or me. What you need is your problem. How you act when nobody else is around is also your business. But if we're in the same room, I want there to be a common code of conduct, which is not a given if both of our codes are outworkings of purely introspective roads to self-enlightenment.

Nothing a priori says that such introspection leads to reasonable or decent outcomes, as judged by others, or that any two creeds so derived will be compatible.

What society needs is a stable code of conduct, and some means of maintaining allegiance to the code of conduct.

Religions provide both. So do some cultures, some philosophies, and some varieties of fairly totalitarian legal systems.

Wars and social disturbances usually happen along the edges of territories with different dominant belief systems. Revolutions usually happen with the belief systems of the rulers diverge from the belief system of the revolters; weakening of the means of control tend to facilitate revolutions and instability.

Diversity is good. As long as we all act pretty much the same.

[donco6]

28. No. There's truth and not-truth.

Our perception does not determine truth, as truth exists regardless of our perception. I just think it's very wrong to allow someone to believe in something false. You seemed to imply in your post that this option is better than simply revealing the truth. Perhaps I was mistaken.

I'm being as respectful as I can be.

[Maple]

32. I'm sorry

but the perception of the truth IS the truth.

And attacking other people's perception of it usually leads to a fat lip.

Don't worry about being respectful to me...I'm not in the least sensitive. :D

[donco6]

40. Fat lip?

Ouch!

I'm curious why someone would respond with violence to someone's questioning of perception? Seems rather juvenile, really.

[More Than A Feeling]

50. self delete

never mind.

[Inland]

26. I don't see how a sense of community comes from

listening to one's inner self.

Just saying.

[donco6]

29. When one's inner self says we need community . . .

. . . it's quite simple.

[Inland]

33. I don't get it.

You inner self says we need community. But you still have to obtain it.

And you can't get community by listening to one's self.

The poster said that some people get a sense of community from religion.

Seems to me a decent enough answer to the quesiton of the purpose religion serves: a sense of community seems "societal" to me.

[donco6]

36. Of course you have to obtain it.

And when you, you yourself personally, feel you need to be part of a community, you pursue it. But not because you have to subscribe to some creed to "belong".

The problem with most religion is that you have to adopt someone else's beliefs in order to belong - from a book or a preacher or teacher - someone ELSE. I don't believe that way at all. I have a great sense of community, and religion has nothing to do with it.

But to each his own, I guess.

[Inland]

39. Now you are confusing two thnigs

1) a creed to belong, that is, a religious belief telling you to belong, and
2) like minded people gathering together to be a community.

The latter you don't get by looking inside.

[donco6]

43. Here's the deal:

No one can convince you (and I'm not just speaking of you, personally, but anyone) of anything, and I certainly won't try. If you're more comfortable choosing to adopt the teachings passed down from others in sacred writings or collections of speeches - go for it. It's just not enough for me.

In my experience, I don't need to follow anyone else to belong to a community. I hope you find one that works for you.

[Inland]

49. You're not making any sense.

That's what doesn't work for me.

There's a statement that one looks into oneself to find a sense of community. That doesn't make sense. You can't find community without someone else. Just saying.

[Mountainman]

31. If you listen to your inner self you will find that we are all

interconnected. We are all a part of this universe, this nature, we are all one with all of that. That is the highest form of community.

[Inland]

37. So I listen to myself, alone in my room,

and I'm supposed to get a sense of community?

Okay, what does a really isolated, lonely person do that's so different?

And while were at it, is there something so different than the mystical bullshit you're laying on me and religion?

[greyl]

34. That "community" is superimposed onto the real world

to the point that the world is unimportant compared with personal salvation. Did "Jesus come to save" the whales?

Give me an authentic animist tribal community any day, one that evolved and survived by doing what works, not by following recieved knowledge bs dogma to avoid punishment.

Humanity was not born a "religious" animal any more than turtles, gnats, zebras or bats.

Imagine

[Inland]

35. delete

[stillcool]

3. control n/t

[kahleefornia]

5. a parent substitute

At our most impressionable state (childhood) we come to believe that there is always someone who knows what to do, who will reward or punish, and who is in control, though we may not understand how.

It's a safety blanket.

[Cleita]

6. A lot of people say that there is something missing from

their lives before they discover the religion of their choice. They say they need something spiritual. I sort of agree, but I don't believe you have to go to a certain building to listen to someone tell you how to live your life to achieve that meaning. I don't know how one would address such a person without imposing your own mind droppings on them.

[Speck Tater]

7. Look at the role of Buddhism in Tibet

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050810/ap_on_re_as/china_tibet_troubles

The answer to the quedstion depends entirely on the religion in question. There are represive religions that seek to control their followers, and there are religions that focus on the spiritual liberation of each individual.

Religions can do great harm or great good. On the great good end of the spectrum is Buddhism. At the evil end of the srpctrum is the "god-hates-fags" people and the white supremicist religions.

(Disclaimer: I am a long-time Buddhist.)

[donco6]

14. I don't even really see Buddhism as a "religion" as much as

a way of thinking or of pursuing life. I find it intriguing.

[greyl]

46. What do you think of this?

The Question...

A Zen Buddhist friend can't see why in THE STORY OF B you've lumped Buddhism in with "the others." As she says, our teacher would say," If you have a question, go ask a tree." It's true that Buddhism and the other major world religions are involved in attempts at ecumenicalism, but I'm not sure that this counts for much. I suspect that Jews and Buddhists are only involved in ecumenism because they're afraid of being swallowed up whole by Christianity in particular and maybe Islam too. What do you think?

...and the response:

None of them likes to be "lumped with the others" or as one Buddhist put it "tarred with the same brush." They can ALL find saving graces (as your friend did) that should exempt them from being "lumped with the others." Ask them, and they'll all produce the requisite sample quotes. The fact remains, however, that they're all products of the same culture and all view humans as the very "subject" of religion, innately flawed, doomed to suffering and misery, and in need of salvation (whether it be eternal life in heaven or release from the cycle of death and rebirth). Together, they function as our culture's harem of scolding wives: always moaning about their greedy and materialistic husband, always trying to get him to lift his eyes to higher, nobler things.

Ecumenism among our culture's religions is not about reducing competition among themselves but rather about standing shoulder to shoulder against the common foe---modern skepticism and contempt. They would like to be perceived as no longer squabbling among themselves over petty differences but as together representative of some great, undeniable fundamental truth that the common foe MUST respect. These cultural siblings would smile on my work if I was willing to introduce animism into their company as a sort of retarded little brother, but they're certainly going to object strenuously to my identifying it as humanity's ancient, mighty mainstream and relegating them to a very recently-formed (and now stagnant) backwater. Luckily I don't need (or even want) them to smile on my work.
http://www.ishmael.org/Interaction/QandA/Detail.CFM?Record=77

[usregimechange]

10. Denial of death, one of them

[greyl]

48. Denial of Death - Ernest Becker great book nt

[More Than A Feeling]

52. I just finished reading it myself.

Some of it is outdated, but the main message is quite compelling.

[BiggJawn]

11. The need to do violence to people we perceive as "different"

"My Gawd told me to KILL you because you believe in the DEBBIL!"

[Inland]

18. And if this were, say, 20th c. Spain or England under Mary Tudor,

I'd agree with you.

But this is America, and no possible generalization can be made about religion EXCEPT that it doesn't provide a means of control, or a societal meaning or purpose.

In America, government provides the means of control. That's why there's the effort by some religious to capture government.

[DanCa]

19. Actually if you shut out all the spin only two commandments are law

Thou shall not kill, thou shall not steal, and they seem to be pretty fleeting as best. Basically I think it all boils down to love thy neighbor or do the golden rule. I believe Abe Lincoln said it most elequently "When I do good I feel good that is my religion."

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. To quote karl marx, religion is the Opium of the People

and I do believe he was onto something...

[jobycom]

21. Freud's Totem and Taboo

talks about that. It's been a while, but as I recall, he basically says that society must have some means to enforce its rules, and the threat of a divinity watching you at all times and punishing you even when you think you've gotten away with something is as good a method as any. Sex is fun, but in pre-birth control eras it can lead to too many mouths without the ability to feed them. So a taboo against sex, reinforced with religion, helps protect society from it's basic urges.

Another use for gods for some people is a continuation of a parent to watch out for them. It's no accident that gods are "fathers and mothers and lords." All these terms refer to someone who takes care of those under their control, who tells them what to do, what not to do, and provides for them. Some grownups don't grow beyond the need for this type of presence, and so gods fulfill that psychological need, giving people a sense that their problems are in someone else's hands, so they can function.

Of course, for many, gods are also spiritual guides, to help people understand how they fit in, how there is a higher good than just their basic needs, and that that higher good benefits society.

Basically, all three of these different types of people can be better controlled through a religion whose rules help to regulate society. A problem occurs when the rules become dogma, and aren't allowed to adjust to new societies. When you have 2000 year old rules controlling a society with no resemblance to the one in which the religion was developed, you have breakdowns. This happened to pagan Rome as it fell, religiously, to Christianity, and to Persia as it fell, religiously, to Islam. In the modern world, Christianity has been flexible enough to fulfill the needs of those who want to cling to the archaic rules and to expand to include those who believe their rules should fit current society. That's why we aren't undergoing a major religious shift today, although religions like paganism, eastern meditation religions, etc, are making inroads.

Religions that separate from governments can continue to fulfill the spiritual, personal aspects without being responsible for secular order. That's what's cool about modern governments, based on written laws rather than the whims of rulers (usually). The spiritual needs can be separated from the need for order.

Okay, that's my long post for the night. I gotta stop this. I could have finished my novel instead of all these long DU posts! Sigh.

[kodi]

23. its an individual need, to help accomplish a religious experience.

Imannuel Kant was a real pissant who was very rarely stable!

sing along with me boys!

Kant was reacting to the forces in society that used religion as a crutch. but religion was first a codification of methods and ideas by which a person could find his/her place in the universe.

I will let the words of Joseph Campbell speak of myth, because at heart, they apply as well to the term we call “religion.“

“The first function of a mythology is to reconcile waking consciousness to the mysterium tremendum et fascinans of this universe as it is: the second being to render an interpretive total image of the same, as known to contemporary consciousness. Shakespeare’s definition of the function of his art, “ to hold, as ‘twere, the mirror up to nature,” is thus equally a definition of mythology. It is the revelation to waking consciousness of the powers of its own sustaining source. A third function is the enforcement of a moral order: the shaping of the individual to the requirements of his/her geographically and historically conditioned social group. The fourth, and most vital function is to foster the centering and unfolding of the individual in integrity, in accord with d) him/herself (the microcosm), c) his/her culture (the mesocosm), b) the universe (the macrocosm), and a) that awesome ultimate mystery which is both beyond and within ourselves and all things.”

Kant was focusing on the third claim of Campbell's thesis. the most important one is, was, and will forever be the last one.

[Mountainman]

41. For me it is like this. For the moment see me as the only living person

on this planet. Where would I get understanding and any sence of myself but from me form my innerself. Now even though I am not the only living person, I still get the same sence of myself from me and not anything out side me or anyone else's religion or thinking. I don't need religion in my life and I don't think anyone else does either, they just don't know it.

[greyl]

45. No, Campbell was speaking only of myth.

He was not speaking of religion as we know it today.
Religion as we know it does not value putting man in accord with the world. It's about accord with the other and after-worlds first and foremost.

"Tribal peoples don't have "religions" in the same sense we do; for us, a religion is a body of beliefs and practices that occupy a domain that is separate from (and sometimes even in conflict with) the rest of our lives (so that someone who goes to church on Sunday may make his living swindling people during the week). I've never come across anything like this in an aboriginal group. Nonetheless, some aboriginal peoples seem to us to be very "spiritual" (and others less so). The Gebusi have lively contacts with spirits that would strike most of us as not the least bit "spiritual" but rather downright profane. This is why, in the end, the most I can say about them as a whole is that they share a common worldview, which I've summarized in this way:
The world is a sacred place, and humans belong in a sacred place."
http://www.ishmael.org/Interaction/QandA/Detail.CFM?Record=658

[greyl]

24. None. Religion is anti-society.

(Other than in reference to itself.)

"The existence of a being or beings greater than ourselves, whom we must serve to survive and to seek favor, has been a constant component of our development, the human development"

That's not true, it's a cultural myth.

Religion, as we know it today as salvationist religion(buddhism included), has been around for only several thousand years. Humanity is 3 million years old. There are thousands of examples of human societies that work very well without religion.

If bringing life on earth to the brink of destruction is a sign of what a truly "advanced society" can achieve being fed by religion, well... we're damn advanced.


edit:spelng

[Lydia Leftcoast]

60. Correction: the religions that survive today are only a few thousand

years old.

We don't know what people believed before that. The presence of cave paintings and grave goods suggests some supernatural belief systems existing among the earliest Homo Sapiens.

You'll find many ethnic groups without churches or established religions as we think of established religions, but I honestly cannot think of any ethnic group that doesn't have some way of dealing with the supernatural and the spiritual. They may not have priesthoods and temples, but saying that this means that they have no religion is like saying that their lack of television means that they have no entertainment.

[Lex]

27. Every society has a religion component to it to some degree.

I think it fills the need to explain death, explain some of the things that we don't understand.

[CrispyQ]

38. IMO

People can't deal with the fact that there is no purpose in life, we are insignificant in the whole scope of the universe & we are mortal.

So religion was invented.

[Skip Intro]

42. This thread was moved from GD

I'm not sure why, but glad to be here none the less.

[Psephos]

44. It serves the same need that DU and freeperville address

Deeply held political beliefs are a lot like deeply held religious beliefs. Both supply a pre-thought-out truth that can be applied to all situations. Both require strict adherence to this truth, and castigate those who dare question it. Both bring a comforting sense of order to an otherwise chaotic and frequently meaningless world. Both supply a community of like-minded people who reinforce the truth over and over to each other. Both, in their deepest extremes, dehumanize apostates and lead to strife and war through hatred of those who don't profess the same truth. I don't know if more wars have been started in the name of religion or politics. Both drip blood. It always starts with the urge to hate people who believe different things than you do.

Harsh, but that's how I see it. I am nearly as afraid of fundie politicos as I am of fundie theocrats. Left, right, Christian, Islamic, yada yada yada, they're all the same when they become rabid true believers.

As with everything else, balance is the key to healthy political involvement. If you're convinced you have all the answers, that's a sure sign you don't.

BTW, good book reference:

The True Believer - Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements
by (the socialist longshoreman) Eric Hoffer. 168 pages, pithy and full of simple, powerful observations.

Peace.

EDIT: hey, I just realized this is my 1000th post. :-) DU rawks.

[raysr]

47. Fear of the

unknown. Religion tells you everything will be alright.

[Zhade]

53. IMHO, humans believe because they need to believe, not because it's true.

There is a great human need to understand the mysterious "Why?" of life, to the point that many will accept as true things that are at best unproven.

[Skip Intro]

54. you refer to humans as "they"

I do too sometimes

not that it means anything

[Zhade]

56. I'm not a believer, so there you go.

Okay, okay, I'm really an extraterrestrial - you found me out!

:D

[onager]

55. Robert Heinlein nailed it...

The most preposterous notion that H. sapiens has ever dreamed up is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all the Universes, wants the saccharine adoration of His creatures, can be swayed by their prayers, and becomes petulant if He does not receive this flattery.

Yet this absurd fantasy, without a shred of evidence to bolster it, pays all the expenses of the oldest, largest, and least productive industry in all history.--Lazarus Long, "Time Enough for Love"

[universalcitizen]

57. The current administration is proof

that this "least productive industry" is not a need of society.

In Iraq and every other country in the world there are those who follow the inner voice that leads to perfect peace and order. Every "religion" came from the perversion of the teachings of some individual who obeyed that inner voice and openned the eyes of a few to the guile of the least productive industry of their day, and then the rug is jerked out from under those who continue on the in their traditions and following of the doctrines of men.

And so it comes again.

What did you expect?

http://www.strongcity.com

[onager]

58. I don't expect anything, being an atheist.

I certainly can't imagine that anyone has achieved "perfect peace and order" except in their own mind. Which doesn't do the rest of us much good, out here in the real world.

[Astarho]

59. It's not the religion

but the metaphors it contains. I tend to follow Campbell and I think it is the metaphors we are seeking out, which is why you can find similar stories across widely varied cultures. The metaphors give meaning and purpose in our lives. They tell us who we are as peoples and individuals.

And it is only a matter of time before someone hijacks this for their own power, hence you have organized religions.

It is possible to separate metaphor from the religion. Look at how much we spend making and going to movies in this country. And as the movies fade from mythic tales to remakes of old TV shows, people are looking elsewhere for metaphors.