IronySandwich
1. You're assuming an awful lot there. I never once said that I thought religion creates this "void" because it shows up after someone is religious. It's an inherent part of what religion is. Just about every religion teaches you that you are "incomplete" without it, and they have various techniques to make you incomplete. It's not circumstantial.
2. No, what I'm saying is that the perspective taught by religions is small and centered around human egos. The religious perspective is wrong because it assumes the entire vastness of the universe is all centered around some hairless apes on a planet in some backwater corner around a common star (one of billions) in a common galaxy (one of billions). Many of them postulate "greater" beings and then give them human traits. Religions' perspectives are small-minded and arrogant.
3.Some slaves consider themselves lucky to be slaves, I value freedom. So yes, it is a matter of perspective, but I don't consider your perspective, wherein the damaged and psychologically hollowed out person is the better off one, worthy of notice.
1. I'm mistaken in assuming that you said:
Quote:
What most religious people don't realize is that it was
their religion which created that void in the first place.
????
If my logic is suddenly failing me, I could have SWORN that you just said that "their religion which created that void in the first place". Either you worded it incorrectly, or i'm just retarded.
We see in YOUR quote that it clearly statest:
-Religion creates the void
-Religion must have created the void before other organizations got ahold of that person (thus we see you stated "In the FIRST PLACE"
wink .
-Read your quote one more time, and see if you don't notice why I "assumed" what you think I did.
To respond to the other part of one, I'm just going to throw a few ideas around, and see if we are on the same page or not. So you are initially saying that Religion teaches a person that they have a void in their life.
Can you tell me what exactly a "void" is in your definition. I have always seen the "void" as a particular effect in the brain, that makes us feel incomplete, with or without religion. The "void" is what makes humans feel like they are missing out on the greater things, and they lack the ability to obtain what they truly want. It is not caused by just one organization, idea, or incident, but by many.
From what you have explained to me about your "void", is that it is merely the idea that religion teaches that humans are not alone, and that they are incomplete without God. Thus, religion must be a part of our society, and taking God away creates the void. Now as I'm trying to be as fair and honest as possible, I do not fully understand how this "void" is the same as my "void", and I think that we cannot come to mutual ground without first establishing what "void" even means. I don't think that your definition or explanation is even close to what it really means to ALL people. And although your definition of "void" may work with your statements, it does not for mine.
2. Then you are arguing that it is a wrong perspective in your opinion. I initially must have said at some point that religion seeks to give new perspectives, in which you said that it does the exact opposite. You now tell me that you are saying something completely different altogether, and I'm starting to think that there is a large amount of miscommunication here.
Although you may think its the wrong perspective, that doesn't mean that it is wrong for some to seek religious meaning behind science. Many people think that the perspective on Atheism is wrong, and that science doesn't always hold the best explained answer for all things. Sure, some people believe in some whacky things, but that's not everyone. And we cannot say either perspective is entirely wrong or right. There is no way to judge this.
3. I used to consider other people's perspectives unworthy of notation, until I took an arrow to my knee.