From my experience sometimes an idea that looks good on paper sometimes does not work well in execution and vice versa. Reality won't argue back against your ideas, but it will point out whether you've succeded or failed in your task. The ideas on paper are only good if they lead to something that works.
Yes, if one idea works better in a certain context then it is obviously a better idea for that context.Pragmatic points taken; note that I never said religion had no use in the real world. I think it probably does more good than harm, overall, and I don't support trying to outlaw it, or anything like that. It seems a little simplistic to categorize all beliefs into just two possibilities: "works" or "doesn't work." How about if two things both work but I'd like to suggest that one might work better?
Oh I'm all into wandering. Just because something doesn't appear to directly apply doesn't mean it isn't useful. It just means you have to look a little more closely to see the application.Besides that, though...it bears repeating that I've got nothing against people practicing personal beliefs, just against the obvious negative effects of organized, dogmatic religion. Also we're debating theology, an entirely hypothetical field, on a forum devoted to an obscure psychological topic. I think we can afford to wander a little into "not so pertinent or useful to real life" territory here, hm?
I wouldn't call theology purely hypothetical though. While you can't directly study God, you can study the effect that different types of faith and belief have on people. And that is really the test of faith anyway, the effects. If you look into it you'll see that certain beliefs and practices have predictably posititive effects, while others have predictably negative ones.