jump to last post 1-17 of 17 discussions (75 posts)

Does Ignorance Cause Religion or Vice Versa?

  1. Mark Knowles profile image59
    Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago

    Which came first -= the chicken or the egg? wink

    1. ceciliabeltran profile image85
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Just like Imagination is the interim for understanding, Religion is an interim for understanding. We try to grasp something beyond our grasp using other people's conception of the truth. It is from there that we acquire knowledge.

      So I agree that ignorance causes religion, but religion is the first step to understanding very difficult concepts.

      1. Beelzedad profile image62
        Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        lol What utter nonsense. Our imaginations and religions give us absolutely little if no understanding of the world around us and therefore cannot be a step towards understanding simple or complex concepts. smile

        1. ceciliabeltran profile image85
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I do not expect you to get it, and will not waste time trying to make you. smile I have accepted your limits.

    2. ceciliabeltran profile image85
      ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I need to just do something but I'll be back.

    3. DoubleScorpion profile image88
      DoubleScorpionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Nice question. I was following the conversation on the other thread.

      My opinion. In an attempt to explain things around them, religious beliefs were born. So ignorance begat religion. But continued belief in religion after facts are known, is a continuance of or reverting back to ignorance. So religion relies on ignorance for its survival.

    4. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hey Mark, I would say "chosen ignorance"(picking not to learn) is what causes "Religion". wink

      As for which came first, the chicken or the egg? lol I'll go with the Egg. The Egg came in many different forms, long before Chicken ever existed. tongue

    5. profile image0
      just_curiousposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No Mark. And I kind of take offense at the way your question is worded. I don't know about all religions, but where I come from it is simply a staple of life. You don't think about it. You just assume you are part of the religion, no matter what your philosophy is, whether you participate in it or not, or whether you agree with the crowd or not. It doesn't matter because that is what you were born into.  You know that they say you have to accept the faith, but you also assume being born into the religion makes it an integral part of you.

      People are not ignorant simply because they don't consider the need to take a clear look at what they profess to believe. OK, well maybe not knowing is the definition of ignorant.  But I still don't like the word.  It's offensive.  You were not ignorant of that fact when you chose it. smile

      1. Daniel Carter profile image91
        Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Strange that you would personalize such a broad question.
        I didn't find it pointed at you personally.

        Additionally, it seems the connotations you have for the word "ignorance" are deeply personal as well.

        If you were to drop all the personalization, I wonder if you would feel any differently?

        1. profile image0
          just_curiousposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I don't know Daniel. I identified with christianity for quite a few years. I don't particularly like to be be called ignorant and I tend to assume I should give others the courtesy of not calling them ignorant too. So, I can safely say, whether I took it personally or not, I would consider it offensive. I know this, because before I stepped away from christianity I was offended when christians insulted atheists. It is simply who I am.

          But I did add the smiley face for a reason. I wasn't really mad, just pointing out that a better choice of word could have been used.

          1. Daniel Carter profile image91
            Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I was devout for almost 5 decades. So apparently I'm wearing the other shoe. I'm not pointing fingers, either, just observing. I tend to not stab in the dark as much as just observe and comment. However, I have hot buttons and I've been known to spew a bit. That's all I'm saying.

            1. profile image0
              just_curiousposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You're right.  I was a bit of a twit.  I had just come out of a thread where a christian was calling non christians heathens, Then here I find an atheist calling christians ignorant.  I was in a mood. Sorry. Thanks for pointing it out. smile

              1. DoubleScorpion profile image88
                DoubleScorpionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Mark is picking on more than just the christians in this thread. smile His question covers all religions...big_smile

                1. Mark Knowles profile image59
                  Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I am non denominational. lol

                  All the same to me..........

                2. profile image0
                  just_curiousposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I do know this. But having been religious, I would assume that I would have fallen into the category he is talking about.

                  Anyway. It doesn't matter. smile

                3. Daniel Carter profile image91
                  Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Yes, I agree. Mark may do his share of picking, but it is always amazing to me that so many around here are so busy taking offense to his wording that they can't even see the shear power of the evidence he brings with him. "I hated the trip to the woods because all the friggin' trees got in the way."

                  In actual fact, Mark has taken me to task a few times as well. After I got over myself, I sat back in my chair and laughed. Then I wrote some smart arse comment back. I think he has a great sense of humor and deadly tongue for accuracy. He's such a bitch that way.

                  1. Cagsil profile image60
                    Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    lol lol

              2. Daniel Carter profile image91
                Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Well, really, when did ignorance have anything to do with a religion? There are plenty of people I've met who haven't got a whit of Jesus in them, or any other god for that matter, and they are as smart as a pet rock. Ignorant of their own surroundings. The only point here is that ignorance wants to be satisfied, and therefore, religion seems to have been invented to satisfy it. Absolutely ironic that religion also seems to perpetuate ignorance as a way of control, domination and manipulation in order to keep the religion "pure." (Mysteries of god and the like).

        2. ceciliabeltran profile image85
          ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          NO I get what she means. Should we use ignorance. Obviously a child would be ignorant of what makes him think, he probably will be told that he thinks with his head but his understanding would be at best theta.

          The beta level would come at 12, where logic is already being used.
          IS it ignorance.

          The thing is, imagination and symbolism is really a stage of the developement of awareness. A child grows through an imaginative stage before it develops knowledge through increased observation.

          It is the same with the human race, the more "imaginative" a culture is, the less educated it is. SO the mind attempts to bridge the knowledge gap with imagination.

          That said, the imagination is the bridge. Religion has many logic gaps, not that it does not speak some aspects of the whole picture. It does, but the logic gaps make it open for imagination to bridge that logic.

          1. Beelzedad profile image62
            Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Doesn't that put the cart before the horse, so to speak?

            How can a child use their imaginations unless they begin observing the world around them, first?



            From where would you get that notion? If so, then imagination decreases with increased education. That's not true at all.

            1. Cagsil profile image60
              Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Sorry to say this, but a baby learns inside the womb and from the mother. The outside world doesn't even exist, except in their imaginative thoughts. The thoughts running through a infant's mind, like what exactly do they think about is only relevant to imagination, because there is no real observational knowledge gained. What a baby learns from it's mother has been studied and tested.

              My proof would be my sister's daughter. She is exceptionally smart, only because my sister would sit and listen to music, and read books to her while in the womb. Being smart comes easy for her, unlike her sister who has to work at it(she didn't get the same treatment- my sister never did the same things). The sisters are 5 years apart.

              Just my take on what she said. smile

              1. Beelzedad profile image62
                Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                It would appear you agree with me. smile

                1. Cagsil profile image60
                  Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Actually, I was stating that a baby/infant would use their imagination, even if it wasn't consciously doing so. The imagination is consciousness in action.

                  What level of that consciousness is unknown. You were saying that a baby/infant/child, either or, would have to use observation before it could use imagination. And, that would not be true. That's how I took your statement.

                  Therefore, I wasn't agreeing with you.

                  1. DoubleScorpion profile image88
                    DoubleScorpionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Normally we see thing pretty close. I am curious of one thing that you said, just to clarify, what do you consider observation?

                  2. Beelzedad profile image62
                    Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    The brain doesn't even properly develop until at least week 25-28 and does not have the integral neural circuitry in place until the third trimester. How is that possible then?

            2. ceciliabeltran profile image85
              ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              you know, I wish I could educate you on the developmental stages of an infant and
              history but I just don't have the time.

              1. Beelzedad profile image62
                Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, it must be a daunting task to skim over google searches to find crackpot sites. smile

                1. ceciliabeltran profile image85
                  ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  it is hard to what you do yes. but there are books, beel. you could go to the library and read up of developmental psychology.

                  1. Beelzedad profile image62
                    Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Really? A library has books? You don't say. lol

    6. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The chicken.
      I can give you at least two reasons.
      But they're based on the laws of nature plus that "ignorant"  roll "religion" of Christianity (as you so ineloquently refer to it), so I doubts ye has the constitution to consider them.  So I does, and will, refrain.

      1. aka-dj profile image81
        aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        let me clarify.
        First came the "primordial soup"
        Then came a virus.
        Evolution started.
        Amoeba came next.
        It became an invertebrate.
        Then came the vertebrate,
        (Fish and the like, you know).
        These eventually crawled out onto dry land and became reptiles,
        (some of which adapted to bird like creatures.)
        These became chickens, which laid the eggs,
        And there you have it.
        A  brief history of a chicken.

        I should get and honorary doctorate for this. lol
        And they say I don't understand the concept. BAHHH, I say! lol

        1. earnestshub profile image89
          earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          That is a pretty good summary. smile

          1. aka-dj profile image81
            aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You may call me Dr. aka-dj.
            On second thoughts, Dr. Dj sounds better. smile

        2. profile image70
          paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Chicken got evolved as did the human beings.

          1. aka-dj profile image81
            aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You are so clever.
            Go to the top of the class!
            You see, your god did not create it all after all.
            Very good!

            1. profile image70
              paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Thanks for your appreciation.

  2. manlypoetryman profile image77
    manlypoetrymanposted 6 years ago

    Good question!


    How about this one, Mark: "Do "anti-religious" statements carry any weight with people of a "religious" mind-set?

    Another Good Question hmm!

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Good grief no. But there are plenty of "undecideds" that take note.  I have converted a few though. wink

      Oh - and Cecelia asked me if I would start this - I rarely start threads myself.

      1. manlypoetryman profile image77
        manlypoetrymanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Well played...and honest, Mark....Kudos!

      2. profile image0
        just_curiousposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Hey Mark. I've been thinking about this. You told me when I first got here this was a giant game, vying for converts. Something like Risk. I figure my conversion wasn't a coup. Probably not like taking any big or strategic territories. Maybe more like Yakutsk. But I guess I lost my cards. Do I give them to you or the christians?

  3. Daniel Carter profile image91
    Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago

    Ewe lot r smart.

    Ignorance apparently is the mainstay of humanity. What we don't understand or unravel must have superstition and magic added to it, it seems. That kind of thinking, as we see by experience, is deadly.

    Can't answer the original question, but I'll pray about it.

  4. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    I always liked this one from Huckleberry Finn.
    "There was a cross in the left boot-heel made with big nails, to keep off the devil." (his track)

  5. Aya Katz profile image89
    Aya Katzposted 6 years ago

    That's a little like asking whether linguistics causes ignorance. Linguistics doesn't cause ignorance, but many linguists do.

  6. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    "a planet so devastated by global warming that it’s no longer recognizable as the Earth we once inhabited." Science is doing a lot to prevent the problem?

  7. prettydarkhorse profile image62
    prettydarkhorseposted 6 years ago

    Our ancestors resorted to mysticism to explain phenomenon, and as society progresses, religion became an organized world view with hierarchy embedded in institutions. The birth of religion is inevitable as society progresses. I won't call our ancestors ignorant, as science explain facts, many stay away from religion.

    1. Aya Katz profile image89
      Aya Katzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      That assumes that religion and science actually occupy the same province, and that both are concerned with factually explaining phenomena in reality. However, a lot of religion addresses how we feel about things, and not so much what the world is made of.

      1. prettydarkhorse profile image62
        prettydarkhorseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I think they are intertwined.

        1. Aya Katz profile image89
          Aya Katzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          They are intertwined. They were once inseparable. Philosophy, religion and science were one and the same. To the extent that they no longer are, religion got the emotional impact topics. For instance, awe and reverence, both of them feelings some people need to experience to feel whole, are more easily accomodated by religion.

          1. prettydarkhorse profile image62
            prettydarkhorseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Human behavior is complex and some people based their behavior on their hunches, cultural and social norms, belief or how they perceive truth - scientific/experiential or not.

        2. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Yeah - only religious people think this. sad

    2. profile image70
      paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      So religion is a sign of knowledge not ignorance.

      1. superwags profile image81
        superwagsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Hehe

      2. ceciliabeltran profile image85
        ceciliabeltranposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Well, it is associated with a bigger brain.  It was a sign that humans want to understand the forces that shaped them. Okay for you Paar...force even if Elohim means THE COLLECTIVE G-D.

        1. profile image70
          paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I like your arguments; may God Allah YHWH bless you!

  8. chasemillis profile image86
    chasemillisposted 6 years ago

    I'm a Christian but I do agree with you that Religion breeds ignorance. It a sad thing because people say that they believe, but no one takes the time to even read about what they believe. People think that Jesus Christ is supposed to only be your best friend. That's for another time though

  9. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago

    The WRONG religion undoubtedly leads to ignorance.  The RIGHT religion will lead to enlightenment and eternal happiness.

    To find out for yourself, send 10% of your pre-tax income to:

    The Right Religion
    c/o Ron Montgomery
    P.O. Box 666
    Wasilla,AK 11111

    Act now and receive a special bonus gift - The Right Religion's guide to spousal abuse and pedophilia for dummies.
    (just pay separate shipping and handling)

    1. Daniel Carter profile image91
      Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I take you and Sarah "Moose Killer" Palin are in cahoots!!?
      Smart move!

      (I LOVE the 666 box number...you beast)

  10. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    Heard that there was a guy that brought all animals that were said to be on the Ark, as is in the bible, to America. Now that is real ecological and would illustrate the divide between religion and natural reality.

  11. profile image70
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    Word of Revelation from the Creator-God is a source of knowledge for the human beings.

    1. aka-dj profile image81
      aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      That word of revelation is the Bible.
      You should know that by now. smile

  12. IamMaster profile image60
    IamMasterposted 6 years ago

    Many religions ensnare their "followers" at a young age, using the youth's ignorance to their advantage. However, ignorance doesn't cause religion. Religion hinders development, keeping you from achieving your full potential. So I'm going to have to say that religion causes ignorance.

    1. profile image70
      paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Was Newton an ignorant person? Please

  13. Aya Katz profile image89
    Aya Katzposted 6 years ago

    The major difference between religion and science is this: one tends to a person's emotional life, the other to his intellect. Both science and religion tell a story. The question when listening to a scientific story is: is it falsifiable, and can it be proved false? If it is falsifiable but cannot be proved false, it might be a good story. The question when listening to a religious story is: does it move me? If it does, then it is a good story.

  14. profile image70
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    Neither the Science nor the Religion support atheists.

    1. earnestshub profile image89
      earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You don't actually know what atheism is do you Parra? smile

      1. profile image70
        paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Atheism is confusion and doubts;one may add to it Agnosticism Skepticism; yet the sum total remains the same; they are certain of nothing.

        1. earnestshub profile image89
          earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Well that cleared that up! lol

          So you don't know, fine. smile

  15. recommend1 profile image73
    recommend1posted 6 years ago

    I notice that this thread has turned into all the usual arguments. 

    To go back on topic, I have always considered that religions are based on the sum of some (usually) ancient knowledge, myth, philosphy, and the reasoning of its day - put into a form that the uninitiated can understand.

    Kinda making some higher level of thinking into adult stories in the way that adults do the same for adult thinking for childen and make childrens stories.

    The function is an issue - what is done with that 'higher' knowledge and the people who do it.  To me it seems to always have had a double function of informing and providing some kind of moral leadership on the one hand hand and as a means of control on the other. Usually a means of state control.

    Today - it would appear that the allegorical nature of religion is not understood by a high proportion of each religion's followers. I consider that this is directly the fault of dumbing down education and the low quality of educators in these fields, the blind leading hte blind.

    So I do not consider that religion is caused by ignorance - but I do believe that taking figuratively the often good advice of the base religion that leads to all the division, death and destruction IS ignorance personified.

  16. profile image0
    brotheryochananposted 6 years ago

    The chicken
    (in whatever original form it was before it was a chicken)
    animals were formed first then they laid eggs.

    a no brainer to a creatorist
    bit of a stumper to atheists though.

  17. Jerami profile image79
    Jeramiposted 6 years ago

    Does Ignorance Cause Religion or Vice Versa?




        Neither !    Birth into the physical realm causes ingnoranc.


       If "YOU"  (whoever you are)   (anybody)    are ignorant ?
    Would you (WE) have enough inteligence to know that YOU  (WE) are ignorant?

        Seriously !

 
working