By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy. We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email
No need to pay just yet!
About this sample
About this sample
Words: 1286 |
Pages: 3|
7 min read
Published: Mar 18, 2021
Words: 1286|Pages: 3|7 min read
Published: Mar 18, 2021
What is your basic definition of religion? You state is as such: ‘It is merely faith in something greater, in something beyond us that we cannot explain or control.’ But that is not all there is to religion. That’s more just theism in general. Religion is far more complex and for reasons stated above in the other comments, can lead to religion being used for both good and bad. I think we need to separate the argument for theism versus the argument concerning religion.
Let’s start with theism: No matter what philosophical arguments people try to make, there is no way to actually prove God. Granted, there is no way to disprove God either. But this is why any such debate is rather pointless. A belief in God lies outside science because there is no way to test the theory of God, the main tenant upon which science is built. Scientists propose a theory and then perform experiments whose results might disprove the theory or stay within its confines, thereby allowing it to survive another day. It is only through this systematic understanding of the world can we hope to continue technological and intellectual advancement (this is not to say art, the social sciences, humanities, etc. do not help promote intellectual advancement as well. But science is critical to the advancement of society. A belief in God is not). Therefore, any argument about whether God exists or not should be left to the individual to have his own opinions. As a scientist who was raised Jewish and has discussed spirituality with others a good amount, my belief in God fluctuates a lot and is extremely abstract – imagine something that exists outside the physical laws, which is therefore never comprehensible to human beings. Whether we may be able to grasp it if there is some life after death, who knows? In any case, my beliefs about God may shape my personality to a degree, but I don’t impose those beliefs on someone else or use them to really guide my life that much.
Now, religion is a whole other issue. Religion is based around a belief in a God and what that God has dictated to his Chosen People or to Humanity in general. It is generally based around certain moral tenants and principles that guide how one should live their life. This religion usually comes with a set of stories that advocate their moral positions and also comes with practices based either off these stories and/or that strengthen the moral values. In this sense, religion is no more than morals and values upon which to live life, but a person psychologically wants some additional justification for believing what he believes or even just a reason to live. Hence the supernatural being and the stories that justify the moral beliefs. Which is where the basic idea of ‘faith’ comes from. It psychologically allows us to handle stressful situations, to hope things will work out, and maybe gives us the strength to carry on.
I can understand many people’s issues with religion. The issue is more concerning organized religion than individual moral and theistic beliefs. Anyone who looks at a basic history textbook would notice that organized religion has been used to systematically and non-systematically target for persecution numerous groups throughout history. It has led to inequality under the law, punishment, and even genocide. As such, most atheists who fear religion, fear organized religion and for good reason if history is any indication. It is one thing to have a set of moral values and having individual justification within your own head that some higher power approves of these values or is working in some way in our physical world to advocate them. It is quite another to want to impose those values on others, which usually derives from some aspect of their religion advocating such imposition or proselytizing. It is yet further another thing for one’s religion to discriminate against different groups, calling some inferior and other superior and from this justification, enacting policies that make such discrimination law.
Let us now talk about one specific topic where theism and religion intersect – does God or some supernatural being interfere in the universe? Given the systematic scientific understanding of the universe, it does not seem that God plays some role interfering in the present. You can argue that he may have set things in motion to begin with, but whether that is the case or not should not impose a precise moral framework on your being. Similarly, if you believe things occurring now happen because of how God planned it at the beginning, it once again shouldn’t affect your moral framework since God starting the universe doesn’t affect how you live your day to day life. (This also brings into questions issues of free will, which are far too complicated to discuss here, but it shows the problems with thinking that God is somehow affecting present life in one way or another).
The more important moral problem with believing God has espoused a specific moral framework is how can you say your belief is right and someone else’s is not? Since God exists outside our physical reality, there is no way to know what he really wanted (those who believe that the Bible is God’s will have to contend with the numerous other works which are believed to be God’s will – this leads to way too many contradictions). This is why atheists make these arguments against religion. People have been using God’s name to justify things for generations, leading to bloodshed upon bloodshed. And anyone who continues to use God’s name to justify their arguments seems to have ignored the enlightenment and scientific advancement. Morality is of course a good thing, but you don’t need God’s will to justify the Golden Rule. Moral beliefs can exist without a belief in God or religion. Religion originated as a way to explain the world and also a way to justify a moral framework and even governance. But science has overridden religion as a way to explain the world, at least insofar as any explanations that have bearing on most of life (as I stated earlier, beliefs in God’s possible intervention shouldn’t alter one’s moral framework or destroy a trust in science). We also have secular laws now based in morals and basic rights we believe all humans should have. Some of them may have originally derived from the morals of religions, but they can exist independent of religion. For example, the Golden Rule makes perfect sense even without a higher power than somehow expects you to follow it.
Given all discussed in this essay, I see two main purposes for religion:
This might be the sense Dan was getting at when he suggested intelligence and belief in God are correlated. I think it’s more that psychologically, some people need a belief in God more than others to get on with life or justify their actions. I don’t know if it has been done but it would be interesting to due psychological and neurological tests on those who believe in God and those who don’t to see if there are significant differences in the brain.
Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled