>> In article <1992Dec24.234010.20861@u.washington.edu> jeon@carson.u.washington.edu (Sangyong Jeon) writes:
>> >
>> >To the optimists who expressed the hope that the atheist flag would
>> >fly in the end, I hope you and me are right. But as long as there
>> >remain people who feel powerless and helpless in a society, I am
>> >afraid it will remain just that - a hope. Mind you, eradication of
>> >poverty alone won't eliminate the feeling of powerlessness some feels.
>> >Even eradication of poverty combined with (good) universal education
>> >won't do that. In this sense, violence and religion cannot be
>> >separated. They are just two different manifestations of one human
>> >desire, the power.
>>
>> Thus if we eradicate religion we will eradicate much of the violence in
>> this world.
>
>Huh? wouldn't it be to eradicate the will to power? Religion is not a bad
>thing in and of itself. In fact, is is a necessary oil for the machinery of
>society. Violence comes from greed and fear, not religion. The conquistadors
>didn't care about "converting" the natives -- they cared about gold. The
>crusades were not religious, they were a land grab. Just because greedy
>individuals use religion as an umbrella for impropriety does not invalidate
>religion itself. C'mon, I would expect more serious inquiry from someone
>who seems to care a lot about logic.
Doesn't everybody care about logic? What I said was basically a summary of
his posts, not my own opinion. Then again, most religious books (the Koran,
the Bible for example) encourage killing or being unfriendly to people of
other religions. Andwithout this blind faith, there would be no possibilities
of greedy or selfish people making money out of it.
>
>> What people really need is the ability to think with their own minds, not
>> just mindlessly follow the opinions of the masses, "just because their doing
>> it too". The amount of people that believe in certain ideas never tells the
>> correctness or logic of those ideas.
>
>Agreed. But what is "correctness" or "logic" other than a useful tool within
>certain contexts. Religion is a tool to help point to a state of transcendence.
>All of the dogma and seeming contradiction is of a superficial nature. At the
>esoteric level all religions are centered on the "mystical" experience. It is interesting to note that the differences between Islam, Christianity, Buddhism,
>Hinduism, AmerInd religions' expressions of this mystical state differ so little
>as to be almost indistinguishable from one another.
>To deny the importance of emotion or the need for self-transcendence can cause one
>to lead a very shallow existence, indeed. You may be able to use logic to win over
>the debating team, but it hardly helps one to woo women. I can tell you what I
>prefer to do! :-)
What everything should boil down to is friendship, consideration and working
as a team. But with so many creeds, this might be hard.
>
>>
>> Well smart people tend to grab the riches, because they have the means.
>> But, as I said, I think the environment is more important a factor.
>
>Alas, this is about as far from the truth as could be (providing your version
>of "smart" is in any way tied to success in academia or IQ tests). Financially
>successful folks are those who possess a strong desire to succeed and the
