Does religion create unity or conflict?

[Honor]

Just wondering. I've always thought of religion as a means to unite people, and to help prevent people from acting "wrongly," but usually when I see religion applied to the masses, I see other things happening as well. Like someone using and twisting the ideals of a religion to suit their own selfish ends, or using religion to suffocate the people, or using religion (and people's faith in it) as a means to justify a BS war or the killing of many innocent people.

lol, OP. I rarely curse, but no shit.

But anyway, the question you proposed is impossible to answer without making generalizations off of the thousands of people I have met out of the billions of people on Earth. But from what I can see now, it seems like much of the "good" that comes out of organized religion can be attained through individual spiritual practices (i.e. praying, meditating) and much of the "bad" comes from the "organized" part of it that involves establishing hierarchy, giving people power over other's thoughts and moral attitudes, etc. I might say, then, that it does more bad than good but a lot of religious organizations are involved in charitable causes. So, it's not always bad when people come together under a religious ideology. It just often is. I think group think is dangerous in many contexts other than religion, though.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

Internal unity and external conflict. More Us vs. Them.

 

[Pseudo]

Depend ofln the person. For some people faith involves recognizing the interconnected ness of all people and the need to care for others. Or some it doesnt

 

[Red Herring]

Internal unity and external conflict. More Us vs. Them.

This. It is actually the same thing. You form a community at the cost of excluding others.

 

[five sounds]

Internal unity and external conflict. More Us vs. Them.

This is kind of what I meant by saying 'both'. I say kind of because sometimes religion brings internal conflict, and sometimes it brings about external unity. In all four of those instances, religion is in some way bringing about unity and conflict.

I was really surprised that so many of you were saying 'neither'. Does one have to happen exclusively for it to count?

 

[Mole]

August 1913 and August 2013

As you read this religion is creating conflict in the Middle East which may spill over into generalised warfare.

A similar situation obtained in August 1913 which led to WW I and WW II. And in August 2013 religion shows no signs of pulling back from open general warfare.

 

[murkrow]

unity is the precursor to greater conflict.

 

[Society]

naturally - if you have multiply forces of unity competing for the same environment your going to end up with a fraction whole.

and thanks god for that - if the solar system was one big lump my back would be killing me.

 

[Lark]

Just wondering. I've always thought of religion as a means to unite people, and to help prevent people from acting "wrongly," but usually when I see religion applied to the masses, I see other things happening as well. Like someone using and twisting the ideals of a religion to suit their own selfish ends, or using religion to suffocate the people, or using religion (and people's faith in it) as a means to justify a BS war or the killing of many innocent people. So where do you stand, does it unite or does it create more conflict than it does good in the world?

Religion involves a frame of reference and an object of devotion, in that respect it corresponds to some deep down human needs, harking back to the dawn of consciousness or time.

I dont believe therefore that it creates conflict or consensus/unity but it can channel either of them. Arguing that human religion is the source of all evil or all good is a mistake because humankind is capable of both good and evil.

Its not religion, certainly not anymore, which is the biggest polariser and creation of exclusivity anymore, in certain contexts yes but not in an overarching sense. I very much doubt that there's many exclusive clubs of uber richies any longer which stress membership of any church, they may still require that members are male, white, anglo-saxons, even if the protestantism, in anything other than a cultural sense, has been dropped. If you've watched Elysium you'll probably realise that citizenship is one of the greatest in-out group deciders there is.

 

[Mole]

I enjoy speaking to people in public around Canberra. It's humourous and interesting and mildly risky. But occasionally I have this same experience. Someone approaches me with great openness as though they know me well, and we have an interesting almost intimate conversation. Until I discover they want to convert me to their particular religion.

This happened to me just the other day. An intelligent interesting person engaged me in conversation with an underlying positive emotional subtext. He was subtle but soon I discovered he wanted to convert me to Quakerism.

I find this conversion business so dishonest, whether it is the Mormons, the Scientologists, the Quakers or the Pentecostalists.

 

[pinkgraffiti]

well, i don't know. create a god, tell people to worship it otherwise they go to hell, create sacred book full of rules to follow and punishments if you dont, start holy wars with whoever does not believe in your god, serve as an excuse for economic and imperialistic expansions... well, unity of course!

 

[Avocado]

well, i don't know. create a god, tell people to worship it otherwise they go to hell, create sacred book full of rules to follow and punishments if you dont, start holy wars with whoever does not believe in your god, serve as an excuse for economic and imperialistic expansions... well, unity of course!

Very true…

 

[Society]

well, i don't know. create a god, tell people to worship it otherwise they go to hell, create sacred book full of rules to follow and punishments if you dont, start holy wars with whoever does not believe in your god, serve as an excuse for economic and imperialistic expansions... well, unity of course!

well, sort of hypothetical - like any conversation about unity without an us vs. them factor would be - but if an imperialistic entity ever succeeded in actually conquering the world, wouldn't the world stand united? wouldn't that be the most likely scenario leading up to it? over the last century we've found that any attempt to create a global alliance has had too many conflicting interests to gain upholding power as an entity, and we've also found that no aliens cared to come closer and declare themselves after hearing the war of the worlds radio transmission (or i love lucy for that matter)... short of a natural collapse of current governments, imperialism seems to be the only avenue left.

 

[Lark]

well, i don't know. create a god, tell people to worship it otherwise they go to hell, create sacred book full of rules to follow and punishments if you dont, start holy wars with whoever does not believe in your god, serve as an excuse for economic and imperialistic expansions... well, unity of course!

Wait? Are you serious?!



See, I dont see a lot of people doing this, doesnt seem that plausible at all and so I dont think people in the past, being at least as clever as we are today and probably much more so since they didnt have half of the distraction, consumerism or cultural distortion as we do today, would've bought it either.

Although, you know what I do see a lot of? People whipping people up into a frenzy about "them", they're so wicked, lets get "them" and teach them a lesson.

What does that sound like?

 

[Lark]

well, sort of hypothetical - like any conversation about unity without an us vs. them factor would be - but if an imperialistic entity ever succeeded in actually conquering the world, wouldn't the world stand united? wouldn't that be the most likely scenario leading up to it? over the last century we've found that any attempt to create a global alliance has had too many conflicting interests to gain upholding power as an entity, and we've also found that no aliens cared to come closer and declare themselves after hearing the war of the worlds radio transmission (or i love lucy for that matter)... short of a natural collapse of current governments, imperialism seems to be the only avenue left.

There's never been an us vs. them ideology in world history which didnt start to destroy itself before got within a million miles of its goal of eliminating "them", the greatest examples you could care to mention nazism, communism, political islam, they all engage in as vehemently self-destructive measures as they do in attacks on the external "other".

Personally I think its because "they", "them", "the other" is ultimately a product of their own minds and there's even a possibility they know that so the possibility that the "other" might disapper is pretty terrifying, if you want a much more moderate but good example of the same thing consider the Bush years before 9/11 when he talked about things being harder than in his father's day because he had no idea who "they" where.

 

[Society]

There's never been an us vs. them ideology in world history which didnt start to destroy itself before got within a million miles of its goal of eliminating "them", the greatest examples you could care to mention nazism, communism, political islam, they all engage in as vehemently self-destructive measures as they do in attacks on the external "other".

Personally I think its because "they", "them", "the other" is ultimately a product of their own minds and there's even a possibility they know that so the possibility that the "other" might disapper is pretty terrifying, if you want a much more moderate but good example of the same thing consider the Bush years before 9/11 when he talked about things being harder than in his father's day because he had no idea who "they" where.

but there's a reason for that - over the course of acquiring more territory to keep under control, you loose people to control it with, your armies spread thinner, lower ranking officers have less social scrutiny around them and are increasingly met with unrealistic logistical requirements - not only encouraging but essentially demanding internal corruption for the basics of survival, which demands more and more internal policing for a functional society, which increases the paranoia and mistrust within society.

today, we are facing an increasingly unmanned arsenal where the cost of conquest can be counted in dollars rather then soldiers, with an increasing capacity to maintain a larger army with fewer soldiers and fewer officers. we are approaching a tipping point where imperialism becomes.. economical.

 

[RaptorWizard]

There's a difference between religion, which is based on authority, and science, which is based on observation and reason - there's also metaphysics, which is based on reality, experience, and perception.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Organized religions, particularly "fundamentalist" ones... create major conflict.

 

[Blackmail!]

There's never been an us vs. them ideology in world history which didnt start to destroy itself before got within a million miles of its goal of eliminating "them", the greatest examples you could care to mention nazism, communism, political islam, they all engage in as vehemently self-destructive measures as they do in attacks on the external "other".

Why didn't you mention catholicism as well in all your examples, since it is perhaps the greatest and most obvious of all? This particular religion has the longest known history of "eliminating them" and "self-destructing measures", as you call them

I'm wondering.

 

[Lark]

Why didn't you mention catholicism as well in all your examples, since it is perhaps the greatest and most obvious of all? This particular religion has the longest known history of "eliminating them" and "self-destructing measures", as you call them

I'm wondering.

You come back to the forum after all this time and waste your post posting to me who has you ignore? Really?

And I am expected to believe that your thinking and actions are guided by reason? Please...