Kinsao, I made a generalization, and it is not entirely well-founded. I agree, some religious folk do evaluate their faith a lot. In part, what I wrote was in regards to, for example, creationists. Some people have walked creationists through the experiments, and explained carefully how it all works, and even after all that, does the creationist adhere strongly to a Young Earth. These same people do fine in other areas of reason, but that doesn't carry over into science that challenges their faith.
Maciamo said:
I don't think that sciences brings any kind of emotional comfort regarding life after death or misery on earth. It takes guts to believe that once you die, that's it - there is no heaven, no eternal bliss, no trumpeting angels or horny virgins waiting for you.
This sort of sounds the reverse of what some Christians feel, they feel it takes guts to live as a true Christian, giving up many things including in some circles social acceptance. It takes for some Christians a struggle to maintain some faith that there will be a heaven.
As to the misery on earth, science brings absolutely no comfort as I see it. This is sort of where religion comes in for some. A Buddhist can believe that even their relatives are paying their karmic consequences, and Christian can believe that there will be justice later on.
Maciamo said:
That is mostly the part that make me describe religious people as people deceiving themselves by living in dreams and lies. It brings them an artificial comfort unknown of people like me (no wonder I am so nervous and anxious, as I know I only have one life).
Looking at history, or one theory of what went down in history, the current orthodox Christianity became more popular than the other versions, i.e. Gnostic Christianity for that very reason, that there is less reason to fear death, and that there will be hope for justice, and a happier existence.
It is a paradigm that gives some people the courage to do as they feel is correct. Take the Christian woman who was eventually killed, she spent her time trying to keep the rainforests from being cut down, and the locals from being uprooted by ranchers. Standing up to ranchers in Brazil just isn't something that people who want to keep this life do, but brandishing Bible in hand, she faced down hired assassins.
In some ways, if happiness is the end goal, and taking on beliefs that aren't supported by science help people deal with life, and feel that they are living for a larger cause than themselves, then religion fits the bill very well. Humans are driven by emotions, and it is towards pleasure that humans strive.
Maciamo said:
I don't think we are talking about the same aspects of religion. One doesn't need to be religious to be moved by even the most religious painting (e.g. Capella Sistina in the Vatican). Likewise, I can be moved by very irrational and nearly religious movies or books. But this is all for "personal enjoyment" -- that doesn't make it true. It's not because I enjoy watching a movie about the life of a saint, a priest or another religious figure that I believe in the metaphysics that they believe in. It's not because I enjoy watching irrational movies or anime that I believe in them. That's the same for religion. I can accept that people find comfort in joining religious communities to help each others, find a aim in their lives in following the teachings of a particular religion or religious leader, or even find solace in the "fairy tale" stories about heaven and all. But for me it's just another form of entertainment.
I was making a comparison between religion and art. Let's take a different example then. When I'm feeling down, or discouraged, listening to some Final Fantasy tracks will often help me get out of the funk. The same tune would do nothing for some, and it would even annoy others. I see religion as a lot like music, with beautiful and romantic ideas that deeply move some people, and sometimes a lot more deeply than just music or movies, cause there is a lot of actualy belief invested in them.
It should be noted that at least I see religion as a step higher than music or movies, in that it is a system, that for those who take the time to carefully understand and follow their religion, includes a set of very admirable morals.
Maciamo said:
It's like bedside stories we tell to children to make them sleep. They are comforting and pleasing to the imagination. But that doesn't make them true. It's fine to use them. But adults should at least know that they are not true. I just find it so sad that some people remain in a blissful childlike state during all their life, and really do believe that the prince charming or Santa Claus exist and will come (you understand that "prince charming or Santa Claus" are just metaphors for god or the divine providence).
Apart from pointing out that we don't know for certain that their beliefs aren't true, and anyone making a claim then has the burden of proof (a theist claiming God exists must prove that, as an atheist claiming that a God doesn't exist must also povide proof), I hardly see what is wrong with bliss. If someone is happy and moral, even if their faith isn't supported by science, I give them that they found happiness, and that to me seems the goal of life, to find a happiness in purpose, meaning, and connection.
Maciamo said:
This is why I say that they have a weak independence of mind or poor reasoning skills. They could very well set their own morals by thinking by themselves about what really matters for them. One could also freely learn about the various moral principles of all kinds of religions and people (famous ones, or just people you know), then compile their own moral rules, based on what one personally trust to be right.
The cross section of people without independence of mind or poor reasoning skills includes both atheists and religious people. We discuss the religious people with poor reasoning skills quite a lot here, but there are a lot of secular folk who also don't carefully reason. They fall into all the popular opinions, etc, that abound. It is now 'popular' in some parts to dislike the white protestant Christian male. They are symbolic of the 'us vs them' struggle against fundamentalism in America.
Maciamo said:
My observations have shown me that anyway if someone with a strong character who doesn't really believe that some moral rules will not follow them. And someone with a weak character, who cannot determine on their own what is right and what is wrong, will blindly follow what their moral or religious leader/advisor tell them (with potentially disastrous consequences).
I agree.