You should be able to hold yourself to beliefs you openly choose to impose on yourself, and help others who choose similarly without external coercion, but the moment choice is absent or removed, its legitimacy evaporates.
It can be an effective for social cohesion in juvenile societies, but has a use-by date that rivals raw milk.
Religion was necessary to get us to this point, so I don’t know how you can call it a destructive invention unless you’re arguing that civilization was a mistake. Its use-by date was in the thousands of years, it was very useful as a technology to organize society for a very long time. It has lost its usefulness, and become backwards compared to newer technologies, but it was a great idea.
I consider religion to be the most destructive human invention because most of the destructive actions performed by humans are inspired, influenced, or justified by it.
Destruction isn’t inherently a bad thing in moderation, but no one can legitimately claim religion has a track record of moderation.
I think fire has religion beat. People stopped burning witches, but they still burn people for entirely secular reasons.
Also, you know, forging blades, firing guns, running combustion engines, etc. Fire enabled war on a scale religion could never match, and as religion wanes fire remains supreme.
The technology to create fire is absolutely an invention. Let me guess, you don’t think electricity, nuclear fission, or antibiotics are inventions either? They exist in nature, after all, so they’re merely discoveries. 🙄
Kind of, but religious law wasn’t just about the afterlife. People believed their gods would punish them in this life if they didn’t follow religious law, and that their gods would reward them in this life if they were obedient and followed all the right rules. It helped that the punishment of the gods would be literally carried out by soldiers or executioners. Religious law was also government law.
The skycake was a later development. In the early days, the law of the gods was the law of the land.
Religion is the most destructive human invention.
You should be able to hold yourself to beliefs you openly choose to impose on yourself, and help others who choose similarly without external coercion, but the moment choice is absent or removed, its legitimacy evaporates.
It can be an effective for social cohesion in juvenile societies, but has a use-by date that rivals raw milk.
Religion was necessary to get us to this point, so I don’t know how you can call it a destructive invention unless you’re arguing that civilization was a mistake. Its use-by date was in the thousands of years, it was very useful as a technology to organize society for a very long time. It has lost its usefulness, and become backwards compared to newer technologies, but it was a great idea.
I think we got civilization despite religion. Religion has been fighting progress all along.
Religion was how we organized civilization beyond blood relations. Religious law was the first law.
I consider religion to be the most destructive human invention because most of the destructive actions performed by humans are inspired, influenced, or justified by it.
Destruction isn’t inherently a bad thing in moderation, but no one can legitimately claim religion has a track record of moderation.
I think fire has religion beat. People stopped burning witches, but they still burn people for entirely secular reasons.
Also, you know, forging blades, firing guns, running combustion engines, etc. Fire enabled war on a scale religion could never match, and as religion wanes fire remains supreme.
What a thoroughly fascinating non sequitur.
Fire was a discovery, not an invention.
The technology to create fire is absolutely an invention. Let me guess, you don’t think electricity, nuclear fission, or antibiotics are inventions either? They exist in nature, after all, so they’re merely discoveries. 🙄
So flint is an invention. Or rubbing sticks together.
Cultivation of fire and intentional use of fire are certainly technologies.
this is the skycake theory right?
because otherwise I’m dubious
Kind of, but religious law wasn’t just about the afterlife. People believed their gods would punish them in this life if they didn’t follow religious law, and that their gods would reward them in this life if they were obedient and followed all the right rules. It helped that the punishment of the gods would be literally carried out by soldiers or executioners. Religious law was also government law.
The skycake was a later development. In the early days, the law of the gods was the law of the land.
so we got religion, therefore civilization?
I don’t buy it.