Free will but how free really?

1.6etc writes: If a person is mollified by the idea of the imaginary sky man and that is how he/she manages his/her stress and anxiety then it is imo a healthy endeavour.

Debateable - it may just be a way of avoiding a real problem, or putting it back. Of course the very existence of religious beliefs are founded on man's insecurity - all the evidence is that belief in deities or ancestral spooks that look after us is natural.

But my thesis is that the sooner we come to terms with facts and start looking to ourselves for answers the more healthy we'll become. Kick away the crutch people!

I actually envy the devout and faithful because where they have certainty, I have angst and yes probably a extra measure of stress.

I can think of nothing more stressful than truly believing that unless I follow some externally and supernaturally imposed dogma, I'm going to hell, or that some deity is reading my mind and watching my actions and will some day hold me account for that sneaky sexy thought.

And I know you will probably think that I can do something social and together with my daughter that does not involve religion and mythology.

I think it would be a good plan, 'cos one day she's going to wake up and think you're wally for beliving all that bells and smells stuff and you'll have nothing in common anymore. Take her fishing ;-)

But my thesis is that the sooner we come to terms with facts and start looking to ourselves for answers the more healthy we'll become. Kick away the crutch people!

I kicked my crutch, a substance, and when I looked to myself I found God and He helped me even further - and now I'm the healthiest I've ever been in my life.

I can think of nothing more stressful than truly believing that unless I follow some externally and supernaturally imposed dogma, I'm going to hell, or that some deity is reading my mind and watching my actions and will some day hold me account for that sneaky sexy thought.

I don't have either of those thoughts. My experiences with God have been nothing but open arms and loving advice.

When I first found God, I was a little scared that He was gonna be pissed at me - but I've never sensed that. Apparently He is always there and willing to help, but you do have to ask.

There has to be something important about us maintaining our Free Will - He doesn't seem to want to get all up in our faces, but instead waits for us to seek Him. I suppose He doesn't want to "make" you believe in Him, but instead wants you to want it. But I'm just speculating.

NCE writes: I kicked my crutch, a substance, and when I looked to myself I found God and He helped me even further - and now I'm the healthiest I've ever been in my life.

It sounds like you found another crutch. But I'm just speculating.

Being a "product of your environment" looses practicality if every individual has their own unique environment.

I am not sure I get what you are saying. Practical or not, we are products of our environments and each one is unique.

People are a product with their environment, not of it. Our wills are, actually, free to operate within their boundaries. That we decide what we will actually do is what puts the onus of our actions upon ourselves.

How would this apply to something like sexual orientation or taste in music? Do we choose the things that we find attractive and is resisting a desire more of a choice than giving in to one?

It seems to me that our volition is just a calculator always trying to balance the equation in our favour. Not unlike an autonomous car safely navigating the way.

Tangle writes: It sounds like you found another crutch.

One man's crutch is another man's anchor. An anchor, in this case, is a world view.

Tangle writes: Sure, but still they do it at least partly because the believe a fiction. Removing the fiction (of religion) would remove the problem.

I agree.

The same that I agree that bombs that kill many, many people use electronics. And if we removed all electronics, then we remove the problem.

I agree that you speak the truth.
But I think your suggested solution is silly with regards to the benefits that can also come from religion if used correctly.

There are bans and restrictions on electronics such that those who want to make bombs that kill people cannot easily do so. And if found out, they are punished.

I would certainly agree with bans and restriction on religion such that those who want to use to hurt others cannot easily do so. And if found out, they should be punished.

But I don't agree that all religion should be removed, the same as I don't agree that all electronics should be removed.
Because there's a lot of good, helpful things than can come from both.

We've come along way since we lived in caves and played kill or be killed without iPads. Why do you think we still need these ridiculous imaginary beings?

Because some people still receive many, many benefits from them.
Some people beyond that even find that religion is the only place they can receive such benefits.

I wouldn't want people restricting my atheism just because a bunch of crazy atheists went around killing people.
There are obvious, simple ways that show how atheism can be understood peacefully.
And there are likely obvious ways that would show that the crazy killers have other reasons anyway (like hatred).

Therefore, I don't want to restrict religion just because a bunch of crazy religionists go around killing people.
There are obvious, simple ways that show how religion can be understood peacefully.
And there are obvious ways that show that the crazy killer have other reasons anyway (like hatred).

Religion is simply, currently, a really good excuse for people to control and use the power of hatred in others.
There are many, many other ways to control by fear and use hatred.

Removing religion won't give you the solution you're looking for.
And it would definitely hurt many, many innocent people.

Find another solution.
(I recommend focusing on the actual problem - irrational hatred).

Stile writes: Removing religion won't give you the solution you're looking for. And it would definitely hurt many, many innocent people.

I agree. Personally, I believe that educating people about the prophecies, the reality of human nature, and the nature of a self-fulfilling prophecy will prepare people to look critically at our beliefs and our needs.

Stile writes: The same that I agree that bombs that kill many, many people use electronics. And if we removed all electronics, then we remove the problem.

No, you're confusing mechnisms with motives. Religion provides motivation to do harm to others. It's devisive.

But I think your suggested solution is silly

I don't think i've said what my solution is yet :-)

I would certainly agree with bans and restriction on religion such that those who want to use to hurt others cannot easily do so. And if found out, they should be punished. But I don't agree that all religion should be removed, the same as I don't agree that all electronics should be removed.

I'm not proposing a ban on any religion - that doesn't work, religions need martyrs.

Nope, religions get rid of themselves through improvements in education and improving secular institutions, reducing poverty, inequality, improving health, justice etc etc etc. This 'need' just disappears when exposed to the light. People don't need crutches.

Tangle writes: Religion provides motivation to do harm to others. It's divisive.

Certain manipulations of religion do, yes.
Other manipulations do not.

People don't need (religious) crutches.

I think this blanket statement is wrong.
Some people certainly do.
For some people, the only way they can carry on is by using a religious crutch.

I see no reason to deprive them of that as long as the religion they use does not provide motivation to do harm to others and is not divisive.

Stile writes: Certain manipulations of religion do, yes. Other manipulations do not.

Very few religions have missed out the 'them and us' stage - Christianity included. As I've said, in most of the West, Christianity is largely emasculated and harmless - with the exception of the evangelicals and fundies. But even they are outnumbered and ignored these days - albeit with the extraordinary exception of the USA where they still have a power base. That many nutters in one country is kind of frightening.

I think this blanket statement is wrong. Some people certainly do. For some people, the only way they can carry on is by using a religious crutch.

They need educating out of it; it's the 21st century. Beliefs are normative - they're learnt, they don't exist naturally, we have to make them up, then teach them. Stop it!

I see no reason to deprive them of that as long as the religion they use does not provide motivation to do harm to others and is not divisive.

I'm not interested in depriving them of anything - these silly superstitions will be blown away in time by humane secular values, just so long as they're not encouraged by allowing them into education and positions of influence.

Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

It sounds like you found another crutch.

I hear you, but I'm not leaning on it. I'm running around living my life

It's more like a light that is guiding my way rather than something that I have to carry around and rely on.

But my thesis is that the sooner we come to terms with facts and start looking to ourselves for answers the more healthy we'll become.

There's some studies that would disagree:

quote:

---

Religiosity has been associated with positive health outcomes. Hypothesized pathways for this association include religious practices, such as church attendance, that result in reduced stress.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journ...

---

quote:

---

The relationship between religiosity and cardiovascular risk factors in Japan: a large–scale cohort study

In longitudinal data analyses, religiosity was associated with a lower likelihood of smoking and excessive alcohol consumption, and a higher likelihood of regular exercise and a lower incidence of diabetes over time. Individuals who were more religious were significantly more likely to have favorable health habits and fewer cardiovascular risk factors, except for a higher prevalence of overweight/obesity at baseline. Religiosity was also associated with better health habits over time and less likely to be associated with future diabetes but not with blood pressure or lipid levels.

---

quote:

---

This study considers how shared devotion to the Virgin of Guadalupe among Mexican immigrants in rural Mississippi buffers the effects of immigration stress. Rural destinations lacking social services can quickly compound the already stressful experience of immigration. Guadalupe devotion provides a way of coping with the daily life stressors of immigration. We test the hypothesis that high consonance in the cultural model of Guadalupan devotion will moderate the adverse health effects of immigration stress. Results indicate that as exposure to immigration stressors increased, well-being decreased among those with low consonance, while the effect was eliminated in those with high consonance. Findings demonstrate the advantage of expanding research on coping to incorporate complex models that consider religious and secular elements and also illustrate how a master symbol, characterized as a cultural model of coping with limited local distribution, yields health effects dissimilar to the mediation normally associated with consonance.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/...10.1111/maq.12372/abstract

---

NCE writes: There's some studies that would disagree:

Yup, I'm fully aware of how beliefs can become a prophylactic or placebo allowing some people to deal with the underlying problems of society.

However, I think that rather than have a pretend sky-daddy make you feel a little bit better about the here and now - opium of the masses - it's better to remove the underlying causes - stress, alcohol, lack of excercise, immigration stress etc etc.

If you look at those countries that have managed to chuck away their superstitions - such as Scandanavia - they are fairer and happier societies. People that live in fair and happy societies live longer and better without the superfluous belief system that tells them that life might be shit now but just believe in this particular magic and when you're dead it'll all be ok.

Yup, I'm fully aware of how beliefs can become a prophylactic or placebo allowing some people to deal with the underlying problems of society.

So then you're giving up on your thesis?

However, I think that rather than have a pretend sky-daddy make you feel a little bit better about the here and now - opium of the masses - it's better to remove the underlying causes - stress, alcohol, lack of excercise, immigration stress etc etc.

I removed causes like those after I became religious and the evidence shows that being religious is associated with not having those causes.

Granted, being religious doesn't have to mean having a pretend sky-daddy - so you can have that one.

If you look at those countries that have managed to chuck away their superstitions - such as Scandanavia - they are fairer and happier societies.

Thinking that supports your thesis would be illogical and irrational. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

People that live in fair and happy societies live longer and better without the superfluous belief system that tells them that life might be shit now but just believe in this particular magic and when you're dead it'll all be ok.

That just looks like you displaying your personal prejudice and bias against religion.

I'll consider your thesis refuted.

NCE writes: So then you're giving up on your thesis?

I've hardly started. The fact that some people find consolation in a fantasy, doesn't make their beliefs real nor does it deal with the underlying causes of their problems. If you deal with the cause, the placebo is no longer required and we can get on with doing more useful things.

I removed causes like those after I became religious.

Well if you're lucky the placebo may last. If not, there's always Prozac.

and the evidence shows that being religious is associated with not having those causes.

It does no such thing. You'll have to work a lot harder to demonstrate that.

Thinking that supports your thesis would be illogical and irrational.

Crap. It's evidence that religious belief is not necessary to feel good about life.

That just looks like you displaying your personal prejudice and bias against religion.

Not only does it look like it, I can confirm that I am giving my opinion. I do have a bias against religion, like I have a bias against fascism, nationalism, headaches and sushi.

I'll consider your thesis refuted.

I'm sure you do. You appear to have joined the irrationals.