The purpose in life

I think our lives are a journey to understand the sub-optimal events in the context of the above-optimal goals

we can’t sink to the lowest common denominator, we have to reach together for the highest

but we have to know what we are reaching for and agree to be in relationship to achieve it.

and one of the highest goals is eliminating the sub-optimal conditions and events – because they are predictable and preventable – we have to stop pretending to not know what we know.

We have to bring in all the knowledge we have accumulated and analysized and turn it all into understanding.

So it’s not that we need to act with coddling towards each other sensibilities, but make sure everyone’s sensibilities are robust enough to handle reality.

And people who cling to religion, are not robust enough as individuals, for the naturalist basis of reality.

we need to understand history, about social, political and religious forces and how it impacts history

the story of humanity, what we’ve done, what we’re capable of

naturalism is the assumption that the world and universe are natural with natural causes and rules

and that by observation, testing and experimentation, over generations and thousands of individuals who have been consumed with tedious data capture, data analysis to understand trends and relationships, but building up a body of knowledge that is time testes and always adjusted for new data and new promising ideas

this is the robustness of the natural world

whereas religion, is generally invented by one or a few people, and spread by the word or the sword – competing in the social forces marketplace of ideas

and as an idea, religion’s only purpose is to control the masses through rigid gender roles, limited education and strict behaviour code enforced through threat of punishment or promise of reward.

Basically, the masses are like single celled organisms, – stimuli response

much like the call and respond sing song of church services

it’s not so much existing, as following a script laid out for you – regardless of what your genuine self would like

so this is why christians say with all honesty, if gays want to get married, then live as if you are straight and be married

and they are confused when we point to the law of our secular land and say, equality under the law means we can form relationships based on love, whatever form of love we can get into relationship with

they beleive in obeying and they are obeying their god and not the secular law of the land

but they have confused these things, because they haven’t lived an existence where they weren’t in compliance with the social norms that are legally recognized.

And they do not understand challenging authority and saying, the spirit of the law is bigger than the letter of the law – so let’s change the letter to align with the spirit of the law.

5 thoughts on “The purpose in life

  1. I think humans get their morals pretty much by nature. Nurture warps their ideas. I don’t think any religion started with the intent of controlling anyone – but once there were a few believers it is oh so easy for someone with a lust for power to see how they could change it to control people. Jonestown, the Moonies… They didn’t have enough control to keep it up. The big religions have been mastered and run by those who understood that long term is better than mass suicide.

  2. If you think about religion in view of history and anthropology, you will find that religion is always created as a way to explain unexplainable questions. It is very, very rarely “made up” by people in authority for the control of the masses. Infact I would challenge you to find current examples of this. I can think of only one example of a religion that was created to control the people. Christianity was not created nor enforced by the majority leadership, nor was Islam, nor was Buddhism, etc. In fact they were origionated by folks who had very little power (although the Buddah had power he gave it up.) (Islam, it coule be said, used for this purpose only a few decades after its conception, however it did not begin this way, nor was it the purpose.)

    • Religion was invented to provide a reason for natural things that we could not yet explain.

      Science has been explaining the natural world for many centuries now and we don’t have to sacrifice virgins to ensure a good harvest or an inactive volcano.

      You are confusing what the inventor of the religion gained vs what the hierarchy of religions gains through time – and the hierarchy benefits from not having to do an honest days work and be supported by the poor masses.

      It’s obscene with all the wealth squirreled away in the Vatican – art works, priceless historical documents – all being hoarded while the Vatican dwellers live in obscene wealth displays – while around the world, latin American are impoverished and living in conditions that are best described as barbaric

      Buddist monks benefit greatly in that they spend their time navel gazing, while the local populations provides your food and shelter and does all the actual work.

      Caste systems are based in religious ideas and religion promotes birth as being some determinate factor in what social or economic class, what roles in society you are restricted to and many other ideas that should be obscene to anyone who believes that each human is unique and equally valuable.

      I have to wonder how much history you know if you don’t understand the social impact of religion – how it has held back scientific advancement and a natural understanding of the world.

      Because it is as simple as that – do you accept that you are living in a natural universe with natural causes that we will eventually probably understand – although, certainly not in our lifetimes

      or do you think there’s supernatural agents at work?

      because if you don’t accept that the universe is probably natural but you’d like to beleive there’s supernatural agents – then there is no discussion possible between us.

      The universe, to the best of our knowledge – and by that, I mean the actual knowledge that humanity has accumulated over time, over generations of scientific observers who have confirmed and reconfirmed earlier work and built a huge body of interconnected scientific understanding, is natural.

      What we don’t know, we can leave as a question mark and not slap a supernatural agent on the question mark as if it’s an answer – because it is no answer at all – worse than no answer, because it means that people are going to be touchy as hell and prevent, delay or deny us the ability to try to find an answer.

      Do I think that there might be more than our current understanding of things? Yes, I do.

      Am I willing to entertain that some religion might be right or close? No, not at all. There is no reason to favour any religion over any other, and they all have the same evidence – none at all.

      Am I interested in what personal appeal and benefits people have within their religion? Yes, but in a conversation where the natural universe in the arena, not the religionverse, which is too inconsistent and inadequate and too small.

      I think

  3. I will disagree on your take that religion’s only purpose is to control the masses through rigid gender roles, religion has a much higher purpose in giving people hope and teaching them moral lessons.

    • Well, going by the history and current events of various religions, the claim for religion teaching morals is dubious.

      Social group complexity explains our behavior better than divinity.

      And hope that’s not based in anything is false hope.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s