"I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world."
Richard Dawkins
Enough said.
This is a personal weblog maintained by surprisingly me! You are welcome to check in here periodically cuz I post things that I find interesting here. Topics posted can range from technology news, opinions, events, links, and cool miscellaneous stuff! If you are a visitor please try to enjoy the stay :D
"I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world."
Richard Dawkins
8 comments:
This is true but only if you are blind.
Religion shouldn't stop you from asking and understanding :-) it's there.
Most religions give placebo answers to the masses. And when those answers are taken as a truth, they hinder the process of searching for the truth.
But this is not necessary consequence.
"This is true but only if you are blind." - I totally agree. Religion cannot stop you from asking and understanding if you are not blind. Because when you are not blind, you see the reality of those religions, and you can use your own judgment.
All religions are anti-intellectual. If you ask questions, and do the necessary reading (and UNDERSTAND what you've read) you will not be religious.
" it used t be said that God could create anything except what would be contrary to the laws of logic. -The truth is that we could not say what 'ilogical' world would look like. "
- Ludwig Wittgenstein
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
i agree with anonymous; if people read and think with an open mind no one would be religious.
A very interesting quote Tala, although I am not sure how it fits the context of this post. The way I understand, Wittgenstein is talking about language, and the humans' inability to express what they cannot (or have not) experienced. Maybe you can explain how this quote is related to our discussion.
Anonymous, I agree to a certain extent. Not all religions are anti-intellectual. Thats an overgeneralization. But many mainstream religions can be considered anti-intellectual.
But it's true that if we read, analyze, and criticize, then we'd take out the poison of any religion.
Devil's mind, it is true that if we read, analyze, and criticize, then we'd take out the poison of any religion, but have you ever thought at the possibility that there is ONE religion out there with no flaws, no poison at all, surely, there has to be one.
I would think that since all religions are made by humans, so they are all prone to errors. But there are still some criteria that makes one religion better than another.
In my opinion, the most important feature of good religion is it's ability to change an cope with the times. Religions need to evolve as the humans' understanding of the world around them evolves.
Some religions encourage their followers to criticize anything and everything, including among other that religion itself.
On the other hand, some religions discourage such practice, especially criticizing the religion in question.
The religions that encourage its followers to criticize that religion is in a certain way self-healing and self-correcting as time progresses.
Post a Comment