He said no religion is intrinsically violent..has he not heard of Islam? This religion mutilates little girls genitalia causing excruciating pain and blood squirting all over the place..HOW is that not "bad"? Were you not aware of this MODERN DAY PRACTICE or had you forgotten ?
What i find difficult to take seriously, is this "conjecture" on the basis of what? Which "conjecture" are we talking about? We can take it to mean a religious moral philosophy based on a group of people that lived thousands of years ago. How about a new "conjecture", humans are able to shape their lives and surroundings because they have become increasingly critical of what is real and what is speculation.
Im sorry, but Wright is completely wrong. Religion is not outside of the human realm just like pseudo science is not outside of the human realm. You could say that for critical science as well, except that two of these philosophies are based on superstition, nonsense, and based less facts, while one of them is the pursuit of the truth regardless how illogical or meaningless things might seem to us.
Here RW tries to argue that religion, on its own, is neutral. Whether it has a positive or negative impact depends on external factors (i.e., on whether believers are in zero sum conflict with non-believers). Really? So the doctrines of jihad and martyrdom in Islam are simply functionally inert-- with no more inherent tendency to create war than Jainism? Wright is the kind of apologist that Sam Harris' work demolishes.
This book is spot on, with regards to the correlation between mans socioeconomic evolution and the evolution of religion, imo.
Mr.Wright is a brlliant mind and It really bugs me when some atheists trash him for not shouting "there is no God" from the rooftops. It just proves that theists dont have a monopoly on narrow mindedness.
7:39 "The kinds of questions that religions have asked" - religions don't ask questions. They only make truth claims so ludicrous that only children under threat of punishment and eternal hellfire will be brainwashed enough to carry belief in them into adulthood.
@fctchk You are right, religions don't ask questions...people do, and religions are a result of people trying to answer those questions. He is not saying that religion is right, just that its too early to rule out some sort of higher purpose to the universe.If you rule out that possibility, just because its counter-intuitive to your viewpoint, then you are wearing the same blinders that theists wear, only looking the other direction.
@rhyfelur When a scientist or otherwise intelligent individual contemplates something that runs counter to reason on top of presenting NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER they file it under "not likely with a probability bordering on certainty”. They do not go around badgering adults the likes of D. Dennet and S. Pinker with their unresolved childhood Magic Skydaddy Purpose Provider™ issues. For a full appreciation of Mr. Wright's unresolved childhood MSPP™ issues, see his interview on Bill Moyers Journal.
@fctchk Yes, how dare he contemplate outside of the test tube. Btw, how's the whole telling people to "stop feeling that there is more to the universe that just a random collection of atoms" thing working out for you? Banging the drum about how wrong people has been completely ineffective towards a solution to any of the problems you cite in your next comment. Maybe explaining why people have these intuitions instead of mocking them is a better approach
Oh, and by the way, yes, there can be a purpose. And, guess who determines it? None other than homo sapiens - who has been doing it all along, all be it messily - now isn't that a liberating thought? So as soon as we stop fellating popes, preachers, prophets, gurus and other frauds, perhaps we can get a bit more focused on it and, say, for starters, end population growth, hunger, poverty, disease and lack of education all at the cost of a few years worth of the world's military expenditure.
seems like he always wants to defend everyones viewpoint, Its like what he really want to say is "Stop thinking everyone, you cant really know anything anyway", an easy way out in any debate. The comparison of electrons and universe is like. What has it to do with an existence of something that have no evidence?, He also stated in a debate with both christians and atheists "To me, god is like a big machine in shape of the universe, so we are all right, ok?", take a stand man and say something.
this guy needs to meet with cliff stoll and the bishop of oxford. I mean, we need this kind of minds if we want to enlighten ourselves and open our human capabilities to a fuller extent. He is applying a deep probe to both religion and science, but to find their relative strengths instead of weaknesses. That's what I get from him. The complexity of nature is so mighty that we have to constantly remind ourselves of our position and capacities, so we can make them mature instead of dying in dogma.
well he said on bill Moyer that if there is a God its probably beyond our scope and we give a image and characteristic to god to make us happy,with what we are doing.
so, instead of religion causing the trouble, we cry "god wills it" and do our usual deeds, out of fear, basically... Puting a divine patina over our actions, we get away with it. To me, that's basic human behavior. You can find it everywhere.
People are willing to bend over backward to the point of breaking their back to make sure they don't break the taboo against criticism of religion. I hope the book is good.
This guy won't say there is a God and yet wants to discuss the evolution of God; i.e. how God seems to have changed in people's minds over the years. It's an intellectual treadmill to nowhere. But probably perfect for those who like to discuss the high theoretical aspects of God. Part of the problem is there is too much theortical God and not enough relationship with God.
If you check around 3:45, he is suggesting a greater unknown purpose behind everything, which is kind of a greater god than the one religions offer us...
@KowKowCalqulator Let me guess your a christian. Christians always want to spout Relationship vs Intellect.. Lets leave out the intellect and just be sheep following what we are told lol. Seriously you project onto the image of God relationship, and think you have a personl, warm and fuzzy relationship.
He said no religion is intrinsically violent..has he not heard of Islam? This religion mutilates little girls genitalia causing excruciating pain and blood squirting all over the place..HOW is that not "bad"? Were you not aware of this MODERN DAY PRACTICE or had you forgotten ?
brindow1 2 months ago
ecological/sociological mad men
spadesiesokay1 3 months ago
IMHO - First half of the book was excellent, as for the remainder, set it aside about 3/4 through. Larger purpose = wishful thinking.
1Skeptik1 8 months ago
What i find difficult to take seriously, is this "conjecture" on the basis of what? Which "conjecture" are we talking about? We can take it to mean a religious moral philosophy based on a group of people that lived thousands of years ago. How about a new "conjecture", humans are able to shape their lives and surroundings because they have become increasingly critical of what is real and what is speculation.
ManyInfiniteComments 1 year ago
Im sorry, but Wright is completely wrong. Religion is not outside of the human realm just like pseudo science is not outside of the human realm. You could say that for critical science as well, except that two of these philosophies are based on superstition, nonsense, and based less facts, while one of them is the pursuit of the truth regardless how illogical or meaningless things might seem to us.
ManyInfiniteComments 1 year ago
Here RW tries to argue that religion, on its own, is neutral. Whether it has a positive or negative impact depends on external factors (i.e., on whether believers are in zero sum conflict with non-believers). Really? So the doctrines of jihad and martyrdom in Islam are simply functionally inert-- with no more inherent tendency to create war than Jainism? Wright is the kind of apologist that Sam Harris' work demolishes.
TonyWilson1000 1 year ago
Comment removed
fctchk 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
watch google video:
Thomas McEvilley on 'The Shape of Ancient Thought'
wikipedia
Greco-Buddhism
qaplatlhinganmaH 1 year ago
Nice book.
123Atheist 2 years ago
This book is spot on, with regards to the correlation between mans socioeconomic evolution and the evolution of religion, imo.
Mr.Wright is a brlliant mind and It really bugs me when some atheists trash him for not shouting "there is no God" from the rooftops. It just proves that theists dont have a monopoly on narrow mindedness.
rhyfelur 2 years ago 3
@rhyfelur
Bingo. =)
TheDreamMechanic 1 year ago
7:39 "The kinds of questions that religions have asked" - religions don't ask questions. They only make truth claims so ludicrous that only children under threat of punishment and eternal hellfire will be brainwashed enough to carry belief in them into adulthood.
fctchk 1 year ago
@fctchk You are right, religions don't ask questions...people do, and religions are a result of people trying to answer those questions. He is not saying that religion is right, just that its too early to rule out some sort of higher purpose to the universe.If you rule out that possibility, just because its counter-intuitive to your viewpoint, then you are wearing the same blinders that theists wear, only looking the other direction.
rhyfelur 1 year ago
@rhyfelur When a scientist or otherwise intelligent individual contemplates something that runs counter to reason on top of presenting NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER they file it under "not likely with a probability bordering on certainty”. They do not go around badgering adults the likes of D. Dennet and S. Pinker with their unresolved childhood Magic Skydaddy Purpose Provider™ issues. For a full appreciation of Mr. Wright's unresolved childhood MSPP™ issues, see his interview on Bill Moyers Journal.
fctchk 1 year ago
@fctchk Yes, how dare he contemplate outside of the test tube. Btw, how's the whole telling people to "stop feeling that there is more to the universe that just a random collection of atoms" thing working out for you? Banging the drum about how wrong people has been completely ineffective towards a solution to any of the problems you cite in your next comment. Maybe explaining why people have these intuitions instead of mocking them is a better approach
rhyfelur 1 year ago
Oh, and by the way, yes, there can be a purpose. And, guess who determines it? None other than homo sapiens - who has been doing it all along, all be it messily - now isn't that a liberating thought? So as soon as we stop fellating popes, preachers, prophets, gurus and other frauds, perhaps we can get a bit more focused on it and, say, for starters, end population growth, hunger, poverty, disease and lack of education all at the cost of a few years worth of the world's military expenditure.
fctchk 1 year ago
seems like he always wants to defend everyones viewpoint, Its like what he really want to say is "Stop thinking everyone, you cant really know anything anyway", an easy way out in any debate. The comparison of electrons and universe is like. What has it to do with an existence of something that have no evidence?, He also stated in a debate with both christians and atheists "To me, god is like a big machine in shape of the universe, so we are all right, ok?", take a stand man and say something.
bigtopofun 2 years ago
this guy needs to meet with cliff stoll and the bishop of oxford. I mean, we need this kind of minds if we want to enlighten ourselves and open our human capabilities to a fuller extent. He is applying a deep probe to both religion and science, but to find their relative strengths instead of weaknesses. That's what I get from him. The complexity of nature is so mighty that we have to constantly remind ourselves of our position and capacities, so we can make them mature instead of dying in dogma.
foketesz 2 years ago
well he said on bill Moyer that if there is a God its probably beyond our scope and we give a image and characteristic to god to make us happy,with what we are doing.
wakwakawhatthehell 2 years ago
If you replace the word "religion" with the word "people" in his discourse you have a much more cohesive chain of thought.
SFTor1 2 years ago
Yes, but he says that, actually, in a way. He is basically saying that religion is the common war code we humans use to kill each other.
foketesz 2 years ago
so, instead of religion causing the trouble, we cry "god wills it" and do our usual deeds, out of fear, basically... Puting a divine patina over our actions, we get away with it. To me, that's basic human behavior. You can find it everywhere.
foketesz 2 years ago
People are willing to bend over backward to the point of breaking their back to make sure they don't break the taboo against criticism of religion. I hope the book is good.
h0tsex0r 2 years ago
Sounds like a book I dont want...
DoctorE0 2 years ago
This guy won't say there is a God and yet wants to discuss the evolution of God; i.e. how God seems to have changed in people's minds over the years. It's an intellectual treadmill to nowhere. But probably perfect for those who like to discuss the high theoretical aspects of God. Part of the problem is there is too much theortical God and not enough relationship with God.
KowKowCalqulator 2 years ago
If you check around 3:45, he is suggesting a greater unknown purpose behind everything, which is kind of a greater god than the one religions offer us...
foketesz 2 years ago
@KowKowCalqulator Let me guess your a christian. Christians always want to spout Relationship vs Intellect.. Lets leave out the intellect and just be sheep following what we are told lol. Seriously you project onto the image of God relationship, and think you have a personl, warm and fuzzy relationship.
myfacevids 1 year ago
Can't wait for the book to come out!
Cardsplayer4life 2 years ago 5