Letters to the Editor
had_enough
Published Letters: 814 Editor's Choice: 48
-
Cosmo, you aren't paying attention.
[Read the article: Manufacturing belief]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]why do I do this to myself?
Cosmo wrote:
You can repeat your mantra as many times as you like--that belief in "the flying spaghetti monster" (boy, those viral internet jokes never lose their sting, do they?) is somehow an adaptive mechanism that confers obvious benefits on its adherents-- but you have not even made a single attempt to explain how religious belief benefits any organism in the evolutionary scheme of things. Do you know what the word
********
I must confess, I am genuinely flabbergasted that you would ask a question like this. Is it not *self-evident* that religion is a survival adaptation? Maybe that's the problem you and I are having: you believe religion is from some kind of supreme being (I assume; correct me if I'm wrong there. I don't want to put words in your mouth). I think religion is a survival adaptation. And that the evidence of natural history is a clear case for my view.
However, be that as it may. I've done this before, but let's try it again:
Take 10 atheists who are responsible, sober, green, world-citizens. They're Team A. Take 10 fanatical Muslims (or 10 of your aforementioned christian rednecks who like guns and have anger issues). They're Team B. Put them on a desert island with orders to annihilate the other team. We both bet on the fanatics, right? Yup. The atheists will be discussing the morality of murder while the religious fanatics are closing in on them.
Another real-world example: you think there was a single atheist in the bunch that flew the planes into the WTC and the Pentagon? Nope. We both know that much. Moreover, I would argue, as a matter of simple common-sense, no science required, that no atheist would ever do such a thing. Could not be induced to do such a thing.
(and, no, the Nazis were not atheists. They had a religion. Same with the Stalinists and the Maoists, and most other -ists and -isms you can name. In every case, adherents of said -ist or -ism were compelled by belief in something bigger than themselves. Something they believed was of ultimate benefit to mankind..that is, mankind LIKE THEM. They believed they were doing God's work, even if a stated "god" was not directly mentioned. Their spiritual morality required them to murder the Other. And they did. Gladly, even. When you think of the great, savage, political movements of the last century, think Jim Jones and you have the gist of it.)
Only religious people have the fire in the belly to do things like that. Religious people do many good things too. But that's not the point.
The point is that being religious, or, more accurately, believing in the supernatural, has been, and still is, a very powerful survival adaptation. I'd argue in a world of 6-billion people it's an increasingly maladaptive behavior, but evolution takes time. We'll die off long before evolution gets around to correcting that problem. And then, the primitive world will be the rule again, and belief in the supernatural will once again be an excellent survival adaptation. It's an adaptation that sows the seeds of its own perpetuation. Rather tidy, isn't it?
Hell, you as much as agreed with everything I'm saying in a previous post of your own, wherein you warned of the dangers of a "world without religion." I think you got it exactly backwards, but the fact remains that your previous post proves my point. Religion is an excellent survival adaptation. No supernatural being involved.
-
@jake...
[Read the article: Manufacturing belief]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]who wrote:
So, you think even atheists are "religious"?!
&&&&&&&&&
Of course. But, then, who you calling an "atheist"?
If we're still discussing the Nazis, for instance, you should be aware that whatever discomfort Hitler may have had with the oddball atavistic spiritual systems concocted by some of his more waterheaded acolytes, he himself most certainly believed in a higher power: mostly, himself. He was, in certain interesting ways, a "god" in his own mind.
Some of this discussion is a confusion over terms. Someone else suggested that calling a political movement a religion was fallacious. I would beg to differ. Part of what's wrong with our country right now is the weirdass hybridization of politics and religion... extremist political movements are very often nothing more than religious cults masquerading as politics..or worse, blending politics in. The people who belong to these cults are merely expressing their built-in tendency to believe in the supernatural. Ascribing godlike powers to Hitler, Jim Jones, or the Pope..all a manifestation of the same survival adaptation, or, depending on how you look at it, a maladaptation....which is where I came in, if I'm not mistaken.
-
someone might have informed...
[Read the article: What you missed while watching "Dancing With the Stars"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... the candidates that until the CIA moved a few hardcore insurgents to Guantanamo for window dressing recently, nearly everyone being held there was innocent of any crime whatever.
The suspension of habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees is an obvious cover-your-ass move by Cheney and Bush, to cover up the fact that they're detaining a bunch of innocents down there. Cheney has been lying about who's down there for years, once it was known what a complete, and total cock-up the entire operation was. Many of those prisoners were turned over to us by the Pakistanis in return for bounty money.
The whole thing is beyond shameful, and the fact the Hume would perpetuate this lie in the most shameless way is beyond characterization.
These turds make scum-sucking pigs look good. And Hume would be best used as pig-food himself.