religion

[maelorin]

the problem with religion is that, done properly, it doesn't answer questions so much as help you to work out which are the questions you really want to find answers to. and gives you a framework and a frame of reference for finding them. [that's a large part of the power, and purpose, of myths]

but then i dropped out of theological college to concentrate on life. [well ok, hoping for sex. it worked, a bit. i have a son.]

Comments

[theheadofstate.livejournal.com]

I'd go one step further and say that religion just closes your mind, being wrapped up in a sense of, erm, destiny.

[maelorin]

that's one of the main attractions of religions for most people - the certainty, and the whole 'answers to everything' ideology.

people are the problem, not systems - those, after all, are people constructions in the first place [even if 'inspired' by 'god' {or his good mate, drugs}] and systems are easier to change/fix than people.

the spiritual dimension of my own life is firmly my own. it has nothing to do with rules or control. its about how i connect with others and the world/universe around me. and that's actually what spirituality is - that sense/feeling of connection.

the pricks who abuse that for their own ends, their own need/desire for power, are way up on my list of people who should be up against the wall when the revolution comes ...

done properly

[obsoletechild.livejournal.com]

wait, are these problems with religion or the religious follower?

seems to me that what people expect from religion, like expectations of science, is sometimes out of sync with what the belief system is set up to provide. if that is true, the fault lies with the user, not with the system.

basically, it would be like ordering a pizza from my toaster or some other such non-sense.

Re: done properly

[maelorin]

the people are the religion - at least in a practical sense. books are meaningless on their own. they're just objects. it's what people do with what they get out of what's inside the books that has real meaning.

just like law, really. its all just words. its what people do that gives them meaning.

i don't suggest for a moment that certain outcomes are an inevitable product of a particular religious system. rather that people often, with great regularity, follow similar patterns of behaviour - they're looking for the same kind of thing from society: stability, support, certainty.

and i agree with you on the expectations. its a key feature of it all. most people are looking for similar things - people to belong with, a place to be, some stuff to eat. as social animals, (almost) everyone has a need to belong. that need can be all consuming for some people.

abuse comes in so many forms. there are no human institutions, be they legal, political, social, cultural, religious, sporting, or whatever that are not open to abuse or have the potential the be abusive.

btw: i'm very clear in identifying who has responsibility for what [and was so even before i studied/practiced law] 8D

most people don't really understand 'religion', or 'science' for that matter. they think they do. but mostly they have half-arsed notions that have more to do with popular culture than education. [i'll get off the horse now, and let it out to pasture 8D]

but, but, but...

[obsoletechild.livejournal.com]

you *said* that religion was a thing that existed seperately from the follower:

"the problem with religion is that, done properly, it doesn't answer questions so much as help you to work out which are the questions you really want to find answers to. and gives you a framework and a frame of reference for finding them."

so, in your own words, religion is a framework or a set of principles by which the follower seeks answers. religion therefore has to be a seperately existing set of premises or a pattern if you will that is accessed by followers.

so confused...

Re: but, but, but...

[maelorin]

yes, and no ;)

religion [as a concept] is a framework for approaching/addressing spiritual matters.

as such it provides a context for individuals to explore their spirituality.

whereas, a religion [a specific instance of religion] is very much about relationships between people and between people and their spiritualities.

as i said above, spirituality is that sense of connectedness, so therefore religion must, ultimately, be about sharing that sense of connectedness. a religion provides a common frame of reference within which to share spiritual experience. [much as culture provides a common frame of reference within which to share daily life experience.]

is that a clearer explanation of my proposition?

[http://users.livejournal.com/_nightfollower_/]

if you ask me, religion is completely out of whack :\