Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Science of the Benefits of Religion

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 363 posts

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#211

Post by bmicraft »

rpmisms wrote: post #128
mensetmanusman wrote: post #4

Religion clearly has mental health benefits, especially in terms of robustness. The interesting question is whether it is a transcendent ‘supra-rational’ belief system, e.g. a cheat code at life, because even assuming nothing matters, it makes sense to believe if you want to ‘be statistically more joyful’ (of course, some don’t want joy in their lives, so maybe it wouldn’t make sense for them?).

I grew up strongly religious, and I still believe strongly, but left the organization due to the people in it. I did have an atheist phase, but that depressed me so severely that I almost had no choice but to reconsider my belief. Without a religious structure, life has no set purpose. Sure, you can make a purpose for yourself, but it feels empty compared to a created, beautiful universe by a benevolent being who got…

As somebody that never felt they had some higher purpose I can't say that I feel any need for it. I can understand you feel like you lack something when lose a higher purpose you've had all your life, but that (for lack of better words) sound like you have developed a dependency on that purpose. What you describe is common for many people leaving religion, but it is also something that is overcome by most after (sometimes a long) time.

Personally, my values of making the world a better place for future generations while having some fun seem to do.

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#212

Post by derac »

dQw4w9WgXcQ wrote: post #140

So much of the US population cruises along unconsciously on an implicit set of Judeo-Christian values and morals. Increasingly many citizens claim to have left religion behind and subscribe to an exclusively scientific worldview, but the majority of their upstanding behavior still stems from religious beliefs. Pressed to reveal its true character, a purely scientific worldview produces no inherent sense of meaning, m…

Our culture / morality are clearly influenced by Judeo-Christian morals. I don't think churches need to be burnt.

However, IMO morality has a deeper source than organized religion. Human beings experience pain, hunger, will to live, and so on. We want to live in a society that allows us to thrive and we can deduce that if we were to kill people randomly then the same could happen to us. This applies to any other moral issue as well. This is social contract theory.

Edit: prior to the development of this philosophy along with liberalism, many people (in the West) were still Christian, but I'd say society was constructed in a less moral manner.

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#213

Post by smackeyacky »

rayiner wrote: post #175
smackeyacky wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an interesting and well thought out response but I have a few issues with it: > Secular humanism, by contrast, emphasizes development of the self, and discourages social enforcement of moral norms I don't think this statement is true. For example, secular society provides the legal framework that reinforces the social practice of marriage. > single parenthood rates is the single factor most highly correlated…

> Poverty is a much bigger driver behind low economic mobility. You can test this, by looking at economic mobility rates for bottom quantile kids who differ along other dimensions. And it’s not just right wing people noticing that these days: https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/01/new-harvard-study-w... > Of all the factors most predictive of economic mobility in America, one factor clearly stands out in their stud…

Chetty also notes that his study can't be used to determine whether single parent families are a cause or an effect. Racial segregation and quality of schooling are also noted as being correlated with lower social mobility in that study.

I object to the notion that there is some acceptable level of violence and abuse we need to tolerate for the dubious good that any institution might claim. There is only one acceptable level of violence and abuse and that is zero.

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#214

Post by temp8964 »

hota_mazi wrote: post #196
temp8964 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am totally atheist, but I am against most abortion. You don’t have to be religious to be against abortion. Be secular doesn’t make anybody free from judgement.

I am pro choice and against abortion. I don't like abortion. Nobody likes abortions. Women who feel that they need to get an abortion don't like it either. It's a horrible, traumatic procedure. But it's a reality that it needs to be legal, regulated, and safe. It's absolutely critical to civilization that women have a choice to undergo an abortion if they choose to. It's their body, their life, their future. Nobody e…

If it's a choice between the mother's life and the baby's life, because of the medical condition, I would say let the mother make the choice.

But if it's a choice between the mother's feeling / opinion and the baby's life, I would say the baby's life overwrites the mother's feeling / opinion. The reason is simple, nobody gets to decide to kill the other person just because he/she doesn't like it. And the existing of the baby is the consequence of the mother's behavior.

The only exception is the that the conception is a result of rape, in this case the conception is not a consequence of the mother's voluntary behavior. But I still struggle with this, because the baby does not become less human because it's a result of rape.

I don't think there is a valid choice between someone's life and someone's feeling / opinion. And remember, pregnancy is something totally normal for women to do. And many women do several times in their life. It's not a punishment, nor a definite suffering or torture.

Also the "nobody else's business" argument is wrong, murder is the government's business.

As for when is the OK time to conduct the abortion, this is the question for people who support abortion. I don't really see the point here. The development is a continuum process. I don't believe there is a definite cut point where the humanness changes from zero to non-zero. Even when it's a embryo, it's a human embryo living in its natural environment, with the full potential to grow to a full human. I also don't see the need of a spiritual concept like soul or whatever.

Typing the above paragraph leads me to think about lab-grown human embryo. Google leads me to this webpage: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02343-7 "Researchers are now permitted to grow human embryos in the lab for longer than 14 days." Of course I don't believe humanness changes from zero to non-zero on day 14. Also I don't believe it's ethical to experiment on some human to gain knowledge to save other human.

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#215

Post by Barrin92 »

spoonjim wrote: post #208

I feel like my life would be better if I believed in some supernatural being who loved me and cared for me and was going to bring me into his paradise of eternal ecstasy after I die. I don’t see how that couldn’t make a person happier and more able to cope with the deaths of loved ones, their own death, etc. It seems like being on a very powerful narcotic that still lets you function day to day. But I don’t see any w…

the point of genuine faith isn't to be a narcotic that let's you function in day-to-day life, it's not some sort of theological Soma out of Brave New World, it's supposed to transform, which involves a fair amount of suffering.

Your life wouldn't be better if you you could believe any of that stuff, and no genuine believer treats religion or God like some sort of spiritual Xanax.

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#216

Post by Jensson »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #4

Religion clearly has mental health benefits, especially in terms of robustness. The interesting question is whether it is a transcendent ‘supra-rational’ belief system, e.g. a cheat code at life, because even assuming nothing matters, it makes sense to believe if you want to ‘be statistically more joyful’ (of course, some don’t want joy in their lives, so maybe it wouldn’t make sense for them?).

> Religion clearly has mental health benefits, especially in terms of robustness.

The question is if this generalizes to society as a whole. For atheists it seems like living in religious communities has severe negative mental health consequences causing them to die earlier, but atheist societies tend to live longer and be happier than religious societies. So in any society it is better to be religious, but you'd rather that your peers weren't religious because their belief hurts you.

The main thing is that they create a social group that you can't be a part of. But aside from that they might also blame the worlds problems on your non-belief, pester you to start believing, they might obstruct your ability to get healthcare etc.

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#217

Post by oh_sigh »

dQw4w9WgXcQ wrote: post #140

So much of the US population cruises along unconsciously on an implicit set of Judeo-Christian values and morals. Increasingly many citizens claim to have left religion behind and subscribe to an exclusively scientific worldview, but the majority of their upstanding behavior still stems from religious beliefs. Pressed to reveal its true character, a purely scientific worldview produces no inherent sense of meaning, m…

Why is religion the stopping point for those beliefs? What if religion is just an expression of something fairly benign relating to social cohesiveness(against external threats) and hierarchy(against internal threats).

Morality can be bootstrapped from selfish means. I don't need religion to understanding that punching someone in the face may end up with me getting punched in the face, and I don't like getting punched in the face. Primates exhibit similar behaviors without religion and merely having a developed sense of cause and effect.

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#218

Post by dwaltrip »

rayiner wrote: post #41
estaseuropano wrote: post #6

There seems to be little doubt that religion, faith, spirituality or rite can have benefits. The question is how to get the good side of all these (community, meaning, satisfaction and fulfilment) without the nasty side (exclusion and intolerance, resistance to or denial of reality, imposition of impossible standards, the denial of one's own preferences and wants). Religion has been a major source of soothing and a m…

I think it’s time to recognize that many of the things you list as bad have a purpose as well and benefits. Remember, organized religion developed in harsh societies were people were always struggling to survive. If you think about a village in Bangladesh, where there is no government with unlimited resources to come save you, imposition of strict rules, suppression of individual preferences, etc., makes sense. What’…

But what do we do if the core factual claims turn out to be false? Jesus didn’t rise from the dead, nothing happens after you die, there is no anthropomorphic super-entity like the biblical god or Allah from Islam, and so on.

If it this turns out to be the case, we can’t just pretend otherwise.

Can we make a better religion that doesn’t depend on false myths?

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#219

Post by NikolaeVarius »

robbedpeter wrote: post #210
hota_mazi wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can start by the fact that their political leanings have led most of these states to have the highest COVID 19 death ratios because they don't believe in vaccines, nor science.

This is overhyped ragebait masquerading as news. The reality is more nuanced - not everyone is on board with the idea that the government gets to mandate medical practice, and those people get framed as stupid or stubborn or antisocial. There are deep and rigorously rational and ethical reasons to be against the current vaccine narratives promulgated by this administration. It's ignorant and disingenuous to dismiss t…

I will like to say I've been to anti-vaccine mandate rallies. I have found all of them with no exception to be anything matching the description.

Everyone I talked to believed in one or in most cases many conspiracies up and down the list. There was alot of anti joe-biden pro trump activity and a lot of Evangelical Christian crap (main speaker led everyone in Christian prayer).

Lots of Bill Gates and Fauci hate and lots of 5g is a world domination conspiracy.

I don't deny there may be some people only there about the mandate. But I've found that , that sort of person seems to be rare

Re: The Science of the Benefits of Religion

#220

Post by temp8964 »

michaelmrose wrote: post #176
temp8964 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am totally atheist, but I am against most abortion. You don’t have to be religious to be against abortion. Be secular doesn’t make anybody free from judgement.

This is interesting insofar as most arguments against addiction seem to be philosophically connected with either spiritual guilt or assigning a clump of cells person status at conception due to the presumed presence of a soul. How precisely do you arrive at your stance in the absence of a soul? Virtually all the actual brain development happens very late in the game and almost all abortions happen in the first or ear…

See my response to the above comment.
Post reply on HN