Is religion depressing mankind?

[Timbothefiveth]

The Christian resolution to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad.

So is starvation, and genocide, and terrorism, not bad?

What is good? All that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, power itself. What is bad? All that is born of weakness.

That is a view that those who are in power are automatically right and those who are not are automatically bad. Is a cripple or lepper truly worse than any oppressive regime?

What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing, that resistance is overcome.

No, I can have happiness without that.

In truth, there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross.

A Christian is someone who believes in Him. By definition, there are billions of Christians.

What else is love but understanding and rejoicing in the fact that another person lives, acts, and experiences otherwise than we do…?

Actually caring about peopel? There are some people who do pretty bad stuff, I shouldn’t rejoice in that fact.

Also on the topic of love:

What is done out of love always takes place beyond good and evil.

I don’t think so. If I kill someone over someone I love, that’s clearly not beyond that realm, nor is it to give to someone you love.

Another goody:

The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.

Genius! Better than any Psalm or Proverb!

I still disagree. For instance, it is corrupting to hold the klan in low esteem?

Men like Nietzsche or Kant or the many other secular philosophers like them are valuable because they talk about reality not fiction.

Are you calling the bible fiction? Was there not a state of Israel and a saviour born at around 0 A.D.? Christians

act as if the god of Judaism was the first law giver. However, history bears out the truth … and this is obviously a misconception. From Hammurabi to Anglo-American common law … the field of law has been evolving ever since the cave men first figured out how to produce fire (and I’m sure even earlier).

So law preexisted religion,

For this to be true, early humans would have to have existed before Him, and then to have had laws before they had religion.

and it will outlive religion.

No it won’t. The sun should eventually burn out, and if there is no almighty being we will need to worry about energy eventually running out.

Just because you can’t imagine a steady compass for law without religion doesn’t mean no one else can.

That doesn’t mean it points to the right direction though.

In fact mankind has lived most of our existence without religion;

Source?

and having religion hasn’t made us any less predisposed to barbarism.

Yes it has. For instance, religion is among the reasons we don’t have polygamy or slavery today.

The only real thing that has moved us away from a primitive savage existence has been science and the evolution of law.

Science hasn’t moved us away from polygamy or from genocide. The force of law has been shaped by religion, for instance, many of the abolitionists were motivated by religion.

 

[srlucado]

Nietzsche said:

The Christian resolution to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad.

I wonder whether this is true? He also said:

What is good? All that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, power itself. What is bad? All that is born of weakness. What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing, that resistance is overcome.

Truer words have rarely been spoken. Another quote that’s pretty riveting is:

In truth, there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross.

A really great one:

The overman…Who has organized the chaos of his passions, given style to his character, and become creative. Aware of life’s terrors, he affirms life without resentment.

Nietzsche has perhaps the best collection of quotes of any philosopher (even though to read through his books can be tedious); but here’s one of his best:

What else is love but understanding and rejoicing in the fact that another person lives, acts, and experiences otherwise than we do…?

Also on the topic of love:

What is done out of love always takes place beyond good and evil.

Another goody:

The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.

Genius! Better than any Psalm or Proverb!

Nietzsche also said, “That which does not kill me makes me stronger.” Yet he went insane–which neither killed him nor made him stronger.

That’s always struck me as appropriate irony…and I sense the hand of God in it.

Leopold and Loeb thought they could be Nietzscheans. See where it got them.

 

[Spirithound]

well yes … but against a dead man?

Living or dead is irrelevant. It’s still fallacious and invalid logic to make fun of the person giving the point rather than actually address the points themselves.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

Nietzsche also said, “That which does not kill me makes me stronger.” Yet he went insane–which neither killed him nor made him stronger.

That’s always struck me as appropriate irony…and I sense the hand of God in it.

Leopold and Loeb thought they could be Nietzscheans. See where it got them.

can you see how deluded it is for someone to imagine a so called loving god had a hand in giving a man brain cancer? I mean seriously man – think about it.

leaving your diatribe aside, just because I posted a few Nietzsche quotes on the board doesn’t mean he’s my ego ideal or anything like that. He’s one of many philosophers who I think made some sense – but of course he said quite a few stupid things as well (the one you posted is only the tip of the iceberg).

He wasn’t even always consistent … you know, sort of like the bible. However, with regard to religion he made quite a bit of sense. With regard to life in general I can think of many better philosophers than Nietzsche (even the Stoics and perhaps the Christians, though there isn’t much of a difference, probably on balance came up with better “rules for life” if you want to call it that).

I didn’t walk away from religion because I dislike rules or want to misbehave with impunity. I simply have a logical objection to faith (formed by my own mind, not any philosopher).

 

[humble_in_doubt]

Living or dead is irrelevant. It’s still fallacious and invalid logic to make fun of the person giving the point rather than actually address the points themselves.

I said he was boring, referring to his work. That’s a fair critique of his scholarship & it’s not an ad hom attack on his person.

Seriously … this is getting a little childish.

 

[Spirithound]

can you see how deluded it is for someone to imagine a so called loving god had a hand in giving a man brain cancer?

What if suffering is redemptive? What if this life is not the most important one?

 

[Spirithound]

I said he was boring, referring to his work. That’s a fair critique of his scholarship & it’s not an ad hom attack on his person.

Seriously … this is getting a little childish.

You also said stupid.
And while it may be a fair critique on his writing style (actually Plato’s writing style), it does not address whether he was right or wrong.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

Defining worth in terms of reproductive success is a different philosophy but not a better one. A cockroach or mosquito can have hundreds of offspring. Aren’t you worth more than an insect?

It’s becoming quickly apparent that this is not a place where I will find reasonable discussion. Anyways, Nietzsche wasn’t talking about reproductive success. Your just skimming the surface (frankly, your not even really doing that). You mind is closed – hence there can be no discussion built on logic & reason. It will only be all of your collective zealous diatribe pouncing the poor atheist, or the wicked atheist (I suppose depending on your predisposition).

Anyways – my conclusion, religion is a collection of stories that never happened, yet billions of people believe they did. There’s no dialog that can be had with a religious man, because religion is something that’s beyond logic and reason. It can’t be reasoned with, it can only be chipped away from the outside.

 

[Spirithound]

Anyways – my conclusion, religion is a collection of stories that never happened, yet billions of people believe they did.

You gleaned this conclusion from the original post?

 

[yellowbicycle]

Ah, Nietzsche! All my male friends in college were big fans of Nietzsche. It got them laid alot. And now, one of those friends is actually a philosophy professor, still getting laid alot. Still thanks to Nietzsche. As it turns out 18 year old girls always fall for the same nonsense.
Anywho, I’d like your thoughts on this one:

What is good? All that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, power itself. What is bad? All that is born of weakness. What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing, that resistance is overcome.

Truer words have rarely been spoken.

I hate to respond to things when I don’t know their context, but it’s been a number of years since I picked up any Nietzsche, so I’m just going to respond to this quote as I am reading it and understanding it. If I am misunderstanding it, please correct me.
You say truer words have rarely been spoken, but I have to disagree.

Is what is good truly that which heightens the feeling of power in man? I just went hiking in north carolina, and at one point, we were standing on top of a land bridge, and the world looked SO huge, and I felt SO small, and that was good. I just kept feeling smaller and smaller, engulfed by the world, and it was a truly good feeling. I think that’s similarly experienced by many people, no? How does that line up with Nietzsche’s thinking?
Nietzsche says that what is bad is born of weakness, but aren’t ALL living things born of weakness in some form or another? Deaf, blind, unable to fend for themselves. Don’t we all start that way? And return to that, in the end? At the nursing home, deaf, blind and unable to fend for myself. And how is that bad? That would put children and the elderly in the category of ‘bad’, and I don’t think that’s true - children are our future and the elderly are our past. Where are we without either of them?
And the idea that happiness is achieved from watching one’s power grow. Hmmm. There is a non-profit group I helped found here locally. I worked on it for twelve years. It has done, and continues to do, alot of good in the community, and, one could say, afforded me a level of ‘power’. I had access to politicians that others did not. I had access to funds that others did not. I had a platform and people would listen. As my responsibilities in my life grew, I necessarily had to withdraw from the non-profit. I am now an ‘at-large’ board member when I used to be president, secretary and treasurer. Newer volunteers with the group wouldn’t even recognize me. But the group is thriving, in many ways it is doing SO much better without me than it would have with me.
My power decreased.
And I couldn’t be more delighted with the outcome.
Isn’t that happiness?
I look forward to your response.

 

[srlucado]

can you see how deluded it is for someone to imagine a so called loving god had a hand in giving a man brain cancer? I mean seriously man – think about it.

leaving your diatribe aside, just because I posted a few Nietzsche quotes on the board doesn’t mean he’s my ego ideal or anything like that. He’s one of many philosophers who I think made some sense – but of course he said quite a few stupid things as well (the one you posted is only the tip of the iceberg).

He wasn’t even always consistent … you know, sort of like the bible. However, with regard to religion he made quite a bit of sense. With regard to life in general I can think of many better philosophers than Nietzsche (even the Stoics and perhaps the Christians, though there isn’t much of a difference, probably on balance came up with better “rules for life” if you want to call it that).

I didn’t walk away from religion because I dislike rules or want to misbehave with impunity. I simply have a logical objection to faith (formed by my own mind, not any philosopher).

Look, you’re hardly the first person to read ol’ Fritz’s work and get entranced by it. His works can be interesting (I always thought *Beyond Good and Evil *to be his most lucid book), and can be in some ways appealing, but you really can’t get too far down that road (which is what my reference to Leopold and Loeb was about–obviously, it went over your head).

And if you think my comment was a “diatribe”–I suggest you read less Nietzsche and more Webster.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

Ah, Nietzsche! All my male friends in college were big fans of Nietzsche. It got them laid alot. And now, one of those friends is actually a philosophy professor, still getting laid alot. Still thanks to Nietzsche. As it turns out 18 year old girls always fall for the same nonsense.
Anywho, I’d like your thoughts on this one:

What is good? All that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, power itself. What is bad? All that is born of weakness. What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing, that resistance is overcome.

Truer words have rarely been spoken.

I hate to respond to things when I don’t know their context, but it’s been a number of years since I picked up any Nietzsche, so I’m just going to respond to this quote as I am reading it and understanding it. If I am misunderstanding it, please correct me.
You say truer words have rarely been spoken, but I have to disagree.

That’s the thing – the context must be understood. He’s talking about how we feel deep down under these two opposing circumstances. For us it always feels good when our sense of power is enhanced.

You have to remember here, what power means to each of us is subjective. Nietzsche is not defining power in terms of brute force. Enhanced power might be getting a promotion at work into a leadership position, getting approved for a mortgage and buying your dream home, or whatever. Now that it’s put in context doesn’t it truly feel good when power is enhanced and resistence is overcome? You’ve been working hard for years to get that promotion, saving for years and working hard at improving your credit score to buy that dream house, now resistence is overcome, your power is enhanced, this day runs a close third to the day your child was born and your wedding day. Applause is thundering your mind – and you remember something you read back in your second year of college & say to yourself, damn, Nietzsche was right after all. This really does feel great!

 

[humble_in_doubt]

Look, you’re hardly the first person to read ol’ Fritz’s work and get entranced by it. His works can be interesting (I always thought *Beyond Good and Evil *to be his most lucid book), and can be in some ways appealing, but you really can’t get too far down that road (which is what my reference to Leopold and Loeb was about–obviously, it went over your head).

And if you think my comment was a “diatribe”–I suggest you read less Nietzsche and more Webster.

Dude I’m not entranced by Nietzsche … he’s a dead German guy who made some wise observations & had some quotes that can rattle the cage a little bit. Frankly I could post a dozen Nietzsche quotes that I think were some of the dumbest things ever said, so I take Nietzsche like any philosopher with a grain of salt.

I’m an atheist remember – we don’t get entranced with stuff … that’s what you guys do!

 

[humble_in_doubt]

What if suffering is redemptive? What if this life is not the most important one?

There is no redemption in anything that we don’t promulgate ourselves. Suffering has no value unless you simply enjoy to suffer (which would make one a self-masicist and hence unstable). This life is not only the most important one – it’s the only one! Very simple.

 

[srlucado]

Dude I’m not entranced by Nietzsche … he’s a dead German guy who made some wise observations & had some quotes that can rattle the cage a little bit. Frankly I could post a dozen Nietzsche quotes that I think were some of the dumbest things ever said, so I take Nietzsche like any philosopher with a grain of salt.

I’m an atheist remember – we don’t get entranced with stuff … that’s what you guys do!

So what exactly is your point, then? That you’re brilliant and insightful while the rest of us are too stupid to realize that where we see something, there’s really nothing?

I’m not impressed, and certainly not convinced. Think we haven’t heard it before? Think many of us haven’t thought through that stuff already?

You seem to think that believing is a passive verb–just switch off the brain and coast–but nothing could be further from the truth. If you’d take the time to read this forum, every day you’d encounter people who have their faith–even very strong, lifelong faith–severely tested. (Just like some day, you’ll have your lack of faith severely tested, but that’s another story.) These are real spiritual struggles by real people, and not to be mocked or treated with disdain–and certainly not passive. Also, you’d meet people here who have searched the world, and spent decades trying to find something to that gives meaning to a world that sometimes seems crazier than Nietzsche himself. They’ve finally seen what gives light to life, and are here to celebrate and share, not belittle the *experiences *(not just beliefs) of others.

You act as though you’re the first seventeen-year-old in the history of humanity to realize that maybe things aren’t what you were told as a child, and now you need to evangelize to a benighted world.

Save your breath. We already know the world isn’t perfect. We’re trying to *do *something about it. What are *you *trying to do?

(And remember, all philosophy leads to religion.)

 

[humble_in_doubt]

So what exactly is your point, then? That you’re brilliant and insightful while the rest of us are too stupid to realize that where we see something, there’s really nothing?

I’m not impressed, and certainly not convinced. Think we haven’t heard it before? Think many of us haven’t thought through that stuff already?

You seem to think that believing is a passive verb–just switch off the brain and coast–but nothing could be further from the truth. If you’d take the time to read this forum, every day you’d encounter people who have their faith–even very strong, lifelong faith–severely tested. (Just like some day, you’ll have your lack of faith severely tested, but that’s another story.) These are real spiritual struggles by real people, and not to be mocked or treated with disdain–and certainly not passive. Also, you’d meet people here who have searched the world, and spent decades trying to find something to that gives meaning to a world that sometimes seems crazier than Nietzsche himself. They’ve finally seen what gives light to life, and are here to celebrate and share, not belittle the *experiences *(not just beliefs) of others.

I guess I should apologize if I came off as condescending (not my intent … but I guess sometimes things don’t come across how we intend in email).

You act as though you’re the first seventeen-year-old in the history of humanity to realize that maybe things aren’t what you were told as a child, and now you need to evangelize to a benighted world.

Save your breath. We already know the world isn’t perfect. We’re trying to *do *something about it. What are *you *trying to do?

first I wish I could say I was 17 (good years) … but sadly I am over 30

I think I’ve done a few things with my life. I serve in the military (and I’m an Iraq vet), completed my law degree (so who knows … maybe I’ll do something really great one day), I served on a volunteer ambulance corps for many years, and a few other things. So I suppose I can at least say I’ve given an average amount of myself for society.

(And remember, all philosophy leads to religion.)

I disagree

 

[srlucado]

None so blind.

 

[EasterJoy]

I said he was boring, referring to his work. That’s a fair critique of his scholarship & it’s not an ad hom attack on his person.

Seriously … this is getting a little childish.

This thread really needs to go to the philosophy forum.

There are rules for this kind of discussion, and having a desire for humility does not make up for not knowing them.

To start: with all respect, “boring and stupid” are not critiques of scholarship at all, let alone fair ones. You will not get away with this kind of nonsense in scholarly circles.

“Boring” is an irrelevant charge, since the fact that an author’s writing does not stimulate you does not make it false. I will caution you, too, that you will find yourself holding a blow torch while standing on thin ice if you critique a philosopher with the charge that he is “boring” before you then turn around an accuse others in the discussion of childishness. It is children who abandon intellectual discussions because the thinking is not entertaining enough for them. Don’t put yourself in that group by using careless language.

“Stupid” implies not just mistaken ideas, but an intellect that is not in working order. It is a stiff charge, and requires examples and actual critique of them to stick. You will find that proving that Socrates was stupid will be a tough row to hoe! Besides, philosophers do not care if another philosopher is stupid, unless he is alive, they are trying to explain something, and he is too obtuse to follow. Forget about measuring Socrate’s intellect, then, and look for the truth. Prove he how he was right, how he was wrong, and then move on to search for the right.

So, please…learn the rules by which philosophers hold discussions, starting with the rule that you choose your words carefully, selecting ones that actually say what you mean. If you don’t, those guys are going to chew you up and spit you out. They may look like bookish geeks, but they play hard ball over there in Philosophyland. It is not a game for for the sloppy or the shallow. Either do it well, and apply yourself so as to make a meaningful contribution, or else find another pursuit.

There is no shame in that, either. Life is not in being wise, but in living wisely. Doing what works is the point of life. If you manage that without understanding why, you’ll be far ahead of those who claim to understand, but don’t do anything about it. Still, a day in the library often saves a week in the laboratory. I’d keep with the pursuit of understanding, were I you. I think you’re up to doing more good for yourself than harm.

 

[Spirithound]

There is no redemption in anything that we don’t promulgate ourselves. Suffering has no value unless you simply enjoy to suffer (which would make one a self-masicist and hence unstable). This life is not only the most important one – it’s the only one! Very simple.

The basic assumptions of our worldviews differ fundamentally. I look forward to your next thread to address this. Once our basic assumptions agree, we can continue this discussion.
Peace.

 

[EasterJoy]

Dude I’m not entranced by Nietzsche … he’s a dead German guy who made some wise observations & had some quotes that can rattle the cage a little bit. Frankly I could post a dozen Nietzsche quotes that I think were some of the dumbest things ever said, so I take Nietzsche like any philosopher with a grain of salt.

I’m an atheist remember – we don’t get entranced with stuff … that’s what you guys do!

You’re lucky those philosophers are all dead. They’d box your ears, the atheists and the theists alike.

My philosophy professor in college was an atheist, too, and I know he’d box your ears, too, for being a lazy thinker. Nothing drove him bananas like flippant atheists with lazy intellects who acted like they knew everything but couldn’t defend their way out of a wet paper bag. Whether you know it or not, you are treading dangerously close to that. He would have had your hide by now, I know that.

I don’t want to see you hurt. Get in the ring, or get out of the ring, but quit throwing haymakers and then protesting that you were never looking for a fight. That kind of protest will not save you, when you’ve stirred up a hive of bees…and by bees, I mean the people who take their philosophy seriously.