• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Was religion created as a limiter to human greed?

Chthonic

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
683
I'm not a religious follower and don't believe in Gods pulling strings. Yet I do see the value and sense in some religious doctrine as being essentially useful to societal stability at large. Regardless of the name of religion and it's idealogy the common thread is that they all warn against human vices and encourage the development of virtues that restrict those vices. Let's call those human vices loosely these destructive behaviours.

Selfishness/Lack of empathy.
Envy.
Laziness.
Obsession with sensory experience (sex/food/alcohol/drugs).
Obssession with material objects and power.
Acts of violence.

The tenents of most religions state that constant vigilance and the active cultivation of virtues is the way to avoid the destruction brought by these things. I can see where in a largely violent and imbalanced world such broad guidelines on people's behaviour would for the most part promote stability within a society. Human's don't have a good track record of knowing when something is enough. We are poor judger's of when our needs are fulfilled and it's merely our desires which are screaming out for attention. Ironically it seems to be that the further away from needs a human gets the greater the list of wants that present themselves. On the one hand we do desire progress and an increasing quality of life as the ages move forward, I am not arguing against that. But there seems to be no limit to where the desire for more goes.

Accordingly were the doctrines really created as warnings to ourselves that without developing temperance and learning to rein in desire, we will ultimately cause the breakdown of society? I theorise that the creation of a judging entity overseeing that scheme is a human construct to put more power behind the warning. I recently read this treatise on the collapse of large societies throughout history. And the indicators of decline and collapse seem to correlate with a culture that no longer puts a an effective limiter on it's vices.

http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2014/092814_files/TheFateofEmpiresbySirJohnGlubb.pdf

I do not intend to create a God debate here. More a discussion of the general principles of living and having stable society. I don't want to get into a discussion about whether or not a particular religion is hyprocritical. More so just human's ability or inability to place a check on it's own inclinations and behaviour. Are we missing a trick here or do we have effective personal and societal control of our natural inclination to want ever more than what we have?
 

Cygnus

New member
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
1,594
The way I see it, the first human religions were started by martyrs who witnessed extreme life experiences and visions and sought to rectify their old ways of life in search of the truth. This led to cults and followings. Eventually, new religions were spawned out of martyrs, followings of people who tried and sometimes failed to overturn an existing social order.
Soon, "large" religions garnered the support of political institutions and cults were considered heretical. And now people think cults are crazy even though the people who join cults often have the vital zeal for a religion.

That's my understanding. So, no, a greater "power" did not engineer religion to curb human folly. I see it as a Hanlon's Razor kinda thing.
 

Chthonic

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
683
That's my understanding. So, no, a greater "power" did not engineer religion to curb human folly. I see it as a Hanlon's Razor kinda thing.

So you agree. It's a human construct designed to keep an undesirable human trait in check.
 

blahblahbob

New member
Joined
Dec 16, 2014
Messages
127
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5w4
I'm not a religious follower and don't believe in Gods pulling strings. Yet I do see the value and sense in some religious doctrine as being essentially useful to societal stability at large. Regardless of the name of religion and it's idealogy the common thread is that they all warn against human vices and encourage the development of virtues that restrict those vices. Let's call those human vices loosely these destructive behaviours.

Selfishness/Lack of empathy.
Envy.
Laziness.
Obsession with sensory experience (sex/food/alcohol/drugs).
Obssession with material objects and power.
Acts of violence.

The tenents of most religions state that constant vigilance and the active cultivation of virtues is the way to avoid the destruction brought by these things. I can see where in a largely violent and imbalanced world such broad guidelines on people's behaviour would for the most part promote stability within a society. Human's don't have a good track record of knowing when something is enough. We are poor judger's of when our needs are fulfilled and it's merely our desires which are screaming out for attention. Ironically it seems to be that the further away from needs a human gets the greater the list of wants that present themselves. On the one hand we do desire progress and an increasing quality of life as the ages move forward, I am not arguing against that. But there seems to be no limit to where the desire for more goes.

Accordingly were the doctrines really created as warnings to ourselves that without developing temperance and learning to rein in desire, we will ultimately cause the breakdown of society? I theorise that the creation of a judging entity overseeing that scheme is a human construct to put more power behind the warning. I recently read this treatise on the collapse of large societies throughout history. And the indicators of decline and collapse seem to correlate with a culture that no longer puts a an effective limiter on it's vices.

http://www.newworldeconomics.com/archives/2014/092814_files/TheFateofEmpiresbySirJohnGlubb.pdf

I do not intend to create a God debate here. More a discussion of the general principles of living and having stable society. I don't want to get into a discussion about whether or not a particular religion is hyprocritical. More so just human's ability or inability to place a check on it's own inclinations and behaviour. Are we missing a trick here or do we have effective personal and societal control of our natural inclination to want ever more than what we have?

It was created as a method for controlling society by the upper class. Christianity just happens to teach decent values when it's not in the hands of psychopaths. Islam is completely the opposite, it teaches cruelty, violence, hatred, brutality, domination, and sadism. Both these religions fulfill the need of ideological control which is being taken over by the TV and internet these days. Only some religions are concerned with regulating genuinely bad behavior, and, even then, only in the hands of someone who has a sincere desire for that. All religions are about control.
 

Chthonic

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
683
All religions are about control.

Yes I agree. I think where I might not agree is what control they are trying to assert. I am well aware that doctrines over the centuries have been cut and tailored to suit individual interests and political climates. But I'm more interested in talking about the origins rather than the embellishments it has undergone over the centuries.

Do you think that humanity has a proper handle on it's own propensity for greed and does not need any external control mechanism?
 

blahblahbob

New member
Joined
Dec 16, 2014
Messages
127
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5w4
Yes I agree. I think where I might not agree is what control they are trying to assert. I am well aware that doctrines over the centuries have been cut and tailored to suit individual interests and political climates. But I'm more interested in talking about the origins rather than the embellishments it has undergone over the centuries.

Do you think that humanity has a proper handle on it's own propensity for greed and does not need any external control mechanism?

Not remotely, I think people are greedy, manipulative, cliquish, naturally cruel and sadistic, violent and abusive. Humanity has never been more greedy than it is now.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
The Origin of Religion

Religion is very, very old and predates control by the cerebral cortex.

At first we were controlled by the voice of God heard through the bicameral mind.

But as consciousness arose the bicameral mind started to break down and we could no longer hear the voice of God and had to rely on the critical faculties of the cerebral cortex.

So to discover the origin of religion click on http://selfdefinition.org/psycholog...ss-in-the-Breakdown-of-the-Bicameral-Mind.pdf
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
It depends on the religious beliefs, but many actually appear to be early forms of science and psychology. A lot of the ancient Jewish laws surrounding food or sex were about things like disease, and they saw benefit in engaging in particular behavior that helped them to cope with and explain life. In Taoism, Buddhism and other Eastern doctrines, there's a highly beneficial self regulating advice, in which Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (a very effective form of therapy) is very similar. ..stop making things about you, reframing that, look at the other persons perspective, meet in the middle, happiness is found in moderation, health can be found if one doesn't binge and follows natural rhythms of life, deep breathing and certain postures enhance relaxation, clear the mind, exercise the body.

Pagan religion is replete with early natural medicine, and most religion, pagan or Abrahamic, value the setting of a focused intention (whether called prayer, spells, or meditation) in order to manifest things in one's life.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Yes, but it's all still not as effective as loving the One God. It all comes from Him.

And the Hebraic Laws are still applicable today! I love God's Law~ Praise Him
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Yes, but it's all still not as effective as loving the One God. It all comes from Him.

And the Hebraic Laws are still applicable today! I love God's Law~ Praise Him

You can actually get a form of CBT especially tailored to Christians or Muslims, as well as Buddhists and Taoist and garden variety atheists. I suspect the developers of CBT to be Jungian rather than Freudian in their approach, they saw the underlying major themes in most world religion.

Which indeed makes a sound basis for belief in a rational higher power, no matter what you call it. How did so many people come to similar conclusions?
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
You can actually get a form of CBT especially tailored to Christians or Muslims, as well as Buddhists and Taoist and garden variety atheists. I suspect the developers of CBT to be Jungian rather than Freudian in their approach, they saw the underlying major themes in most world religion.

Which indeed makes a sound basis for belief in a rational higher power, no matter what you call it. How did so many people come to similar conclusions?
I would like to try it out. I'd like to be an amateur Christian therapist. And see how it goes. If anyone wants free therapy, hit me up. :)
 

á´…eparted

passages
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,265
As I see it, religion is a consequence of being human. It sort of happens by accident from survival and societal instincts from the need to extrapolate/predict what is unseen/unknown. Some will be more predisposed to it than others.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I would like to try it out. I'd like to be an amateur Christian therapist. And see how it goes. If anyone wants free therapy, hit me up. :)

:) cool, how INFJ of you! CBT in all forms emphasizes things like focusing on positives rather than negatives (being thankful) and to stop catastrophic thinking (like having faith) ...it also emphasizes setting goals and taking action (responsibility for ones own choices). I have encountered people who don't like it, because they did not like some one telling them to consciously re direct their energy and to stop dwelling in negativity and self pity.This goes back to you being your own best therapist though. I have no idea how anyone can help someone who doesn't want to help themselves, no matter what the problem is.
 

Evee

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
2,285
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Religion is very, very old and predates control by the cerebral cortex.

At first we were controlled by the voice of God heard through the bicameral mind.

But as consciousness arose the bicameral mind started to break down and we could no longer hear the voice of God and had to rely on the critical faculties of the cerebral cortex.

So to discover the origin of religion click on http://selfdefinition.org/psycholog...ss-in-the-Breakdown-of-the-Bicameral-Mind.pdf

Fascinating.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Religion is very, very old and predates control by the cerebral cortex.

At first we were controlled by the voice of God heard through the bicameral mind.

But as consciousness arose the bicameral mind started to break down and we could no longer hear the voice of God and had to rely on the critical faculties of the cerebral cortex.

So to discover the origin of religion click on http://selfdefinition.org/psycholog...ss-in-the-Breakdown-of-the-Bicameral-Mind.pdf

That's a controversial book Mole, it's a possibility but not fact. I do find it interesting though in yoga they teach you that the higher self is actually the watcher, not all that chattering that goes on, repeating parental criticisms or making grocery lists. In essence, the total opposite (he posits the higher self was an unconscious chattering mind not the watcher).

I think it's interesting that he attempts to say early man was similar to a schizophrenic, does that mean he also thinks this is how mammalian brains work in the animal kingdom? And how about the possibility that the voice of God wasn't similar to schizophrenia, but more like Ni flashes of insight.

Be still and know that I am God. It's the clearing of the mind, the quietness. Listening to nature. Etc.
 

Chthonic

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
683
As I see it, religion is a consequence of being human. It sort of happens by accident from survival and societal instincts from the need to extrapolate/predict what is unseen/unknown. Some will be more predisposed to it than others.

I'm pretty much in agreement with this. Even in modern society survival is still tenuous. I have no proof that I will still exist next Tuesday. Any number of things could happen to me between now and then, and lets face it, why not me because someone dies every single day. So the mind tends to latch onto the future and convince itself that the future is assured. We develop a kind of optimistic delusion about our certainty of living to believe anything else is quite frankly paralysing.

This kind of faith is necessary to wake up everyday, go in search of food (however it is you do that) and then meet the challenges of the day. Without it, you get paranoid about the possibility of your own demise and possibly will never leave your house again. But once that has been established and you believe you will live to see another day the problem still remains....awful things happen to people for no apparent reason. It then becomes necessary to placate the fear complex again and believe in something, anything so you can not dwell on this hideous possibility. I guess a rudimentary morality system helps deal with the rising fear of being murdered, robbed, maimed, etc. If you believe that others are also adhering to this set of beliefs then you can be deluded that it will never happen to you.

From that position I can completely understand xenophobia as well. Who wouldn't be worried about meeting someone who may have completely different ideas about what's right and whats wrong and act accordingly.
 

Chthonic

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
683
That's a controversial book Mole, it's a possibility but not fact.

I think it's interesting that he attempts to say early man was similar to a schizophrenic,

My big caveat with that particular body of work is actually his assertion for the proof of it, ie that schizophrenia is a remnant of this type of mind. He posits that the right hemisphere when acting independantly of the left comes across as auditory hallucinations. But what about all those people that had their left and right hemisphere's surgically seperated as a treatment for seizures. They didn't end up with the results he theorises, auditory hallucinations. Instead they ended up with ambulatory problems as they could no longer co-ordinate movements on both sides of their bodies directly.

That was just the first objection I had to the overall theory. The others I harbour rest with interpreting ancient writings literally and using that as evidence that bicameral societies existed. There is no way to know what context those writings were laid down in. Just as there is no way to know exactly what ancient life was like. It's a plausible theory but just a theory all the same.
 

blahblahbob

New member
Joined
Dec 16, 2014
Messages
127
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5w4
I'm pretty much in agreement with this. Even in modern society survival is still tenuous. I have no proof that I will still exist next Tuesday. Any number of things could happen to me between now and then, and lets face it, why not me because someone dies every single day. So the mind tends to latch onto the future and convince itself that the future is assured. We develop a kind of optimistic delusion about our certainty of living to believe anything else is quite frankly paralysing.

This kind of faith is necessary to wake up everyday, go in search of food (however it is you do that) and then meet the challenges of the day. Without it, you get paranoid about the possibility of your own demise and possibly will never leave your house again. But once that has been established and you believe you will live to see another day the problem still remains....awful things happen to people for no apparent reason. It then becomes necessary to placate the fear complex again and believe in something, anything so you can not dwell on this hideous possibility. I guess a rudimentary morality system helps deal with the rising fear of being murdered, robbed, maimed, etc. If you believe that others are also adhering to this set of beliefs then you can be deluded that it will never happen to you.

From that position I can completely understand xenophobia as well. Who wouldn't be worried about meeting someone who may have completely different ideas about what's right and whats wrong and act accordingly.

Nonsense, plenty of atheists go out and do stuff every day perfectly fine. There is no deity and it's easy to live with that. It's not easy to live with the followers of deities because they'll do all sorts of horrendous things to you in the name of their deity. Religion really has more to do with social cohesion than individual morality. At the drop of a hat religious people torture, rape, murder, and pillage if they believe it is sanctioned by their religious leaders - same goes for extreme nationalists. The only thing religion provides is a strong tribal unit which a large group can work together with. Sometimes these groups are benevolent, other times they are ruthlessly amoral, killing, stealing, and raping - as long as the people they're doing it to aren't a part of their group.

Think of Salem, the members of the community turned against their own people and started torturing them and executing them by the dozens. None of these people had done anything wrong other than have a religious leader point a finger at them. Their property was seized and turned over to the religious leaders who were torturing and murdering them. Sure, religion helps some people get along sometimes, but no more or less than any other ideological system.
 

Chthonic

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
683
Nonsense, plenty of atheists go out and do stuff every day perfectly fine.

Yes I know this I am one of them. I'm not talking about the existence of deity, this thread is about using religious doctrine as a social system for stability. Hence the reason why I have purposefully not started a discussion about any particular religion because that would be missing the point. I'm talking about the human minds need for a sense of certainty and stability in an uncertain world not a belief in deity. This was covered in the OP.

Religion really has more to do with social cohesion than individual morality.

Yes that is exactly what I put forth in the OP.
 

blahblahbob

New member
Joined
Dec 16, 2014
Messages
127
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5w4
Yes I know this I am one of them. I'm not talking about the existence of deity, this thread is about using religious doctrine as a social system for stability. Hence the reason why I have purposefully not started a discussion about any particular religion because that would be missing the point. I'm talking about the human minds need for a sense of certainty and stability in an uncertain world not a belief in deity. This was covered in the OP.



Yes that is exactly what I put forth in the OP.

You stated that you believe that religion counteracts the "baser instincts" when that may be true in some cases, in the United States, for example, we see quite the opposite. Religious people are more prone to believe in torture, believe in greed, believe in materialism - than non-believers. So it really matters who is holding the reigns of the religion and how loved by the people that person is.
 
Top