quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: In the same vein, don't blame alcohol for the alcoholics.
Or electricity for electric chairs, or water for drownings, or love for stalkers. Anything can be warped to purposes for which it is not intended. The more powerful, the more consequential this is.
(Lest, someone doubt my liberal credentials, I would point out that the primary purpose of guns is to kill or injure.)
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did kmb's expounding help? If not, I can't think how more words will. It's a pretty simple sentence.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: Did kmb's expounding help? If not, I can't think how more words will. It's a pretty simple sentence.
Well, there is this "habit" of mine, of complicating things. What you said about alcohol might be taken like this: "there are alcoholics in the world, because there is alcohol, period". And that does not help "defending" the moderate consumption in the face of the extremists who parse it like: "if we eradicate alcohol, there will be no more alcoholics". If you explained a bit your context (like kmbboots did), my comment would have been futile (and therefore inexistent).
posted
No, I was agreeing with your post ('don't blame religion for the actions of fundamentalists') by offering another example of something being used in a harmful and unintended manner.
The sentence you quoted wasn't meant to be sarcastic.
Man, I really didn't think it was confusing. Apologies all around to anyone I gave a headache.
Edit:
quote:What you said about alcohol might be taken like this: "there are alcoholics in the world, because there is alcohol, period".
I meant to give the view opposite from this one. Or, 'don't blame objects, or beliefs, or causes, blame the people misusing them.'
I also noticed that my original post didn't immediately follow the post of kmb's that it was intended to. I would've have quoted the part I was agreeing with if I'd noticed the post in between ours.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm glad, too. Thanks for the clarification.
edit to add: I think my confusion was because, too often, people do blame alchoholism on the alchohol.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it makes you feel better, I understood what you were saying the first time JT. So you weren't too far out there. Or else I'm just out there with you.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by theamazeeaz: […]I made my confirmation for my grandmother, who may or may not live to see my children (I would have to have some in the next 10 years). She would be shrewd enough to figure out if I didn't baptize my kids.
I think it would all boil down to what my husband wants. I'd like to marry another atheist, but if Mr. Right enjoys vacation bible school, then I'll do what he wants.
Inspired by these lines, I have another question:
Whom would you “fake” your religious outward expressions for?
I don’t use fake here as a negative term. I reckon there are lots of cases where declaring and/or acting in a way that doesn’t match your true convictions might be justified. It is subjective, and that is why I’m asking. Who matters enough for you to justify such a behaviour (and in what kind of situations)? Family? Friends? Anybody? Nobody?
Note: I use “fake” because it means that the “true convictions” are not changed. I’m not talking about conversion.
posted
The alcohol analogy is very interesting to me. I'm interested in following it on another path, that of addiction. The question is how much do you NEED religion. Is religion addictive?
People cannot become heroine addicts without heroine. Their personality may or may not lead them to addictive or self-destructive behavior, but the chemical substance itself reinforces the behavior by changing the body chemistry, causing withdrawal symptoms if the drug isn't supplied.
Is religion a drug in some senses? Do people feel physical withdrawal symptoms if they quit religion?
There have been studies of the changes in the brain when people have religious experiences. Can religion be addictive then? Either from a social and psychological standpoint, or even from a physical standpoint.
Do religious experiences cause people to seek out further religious experiences? Can you get hooked on God?
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think some types of people can get hooked on "religious experiences" but I think a far greater number get "hooked" on the social aspect of their religion. I know it was hard for me for a long time after I left my church because there really isn't any other institution that fills the social role that churches fill. I don't think it's a physical or chemical addiction, though. Sometimes I still feel that lack and it has been plenty long enough since I've been to church for any physical or chemical processes to reset themselves.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
KarlEd: I think you make good points. I don't know about physical addiction, but I'm willing to withhold judgment. I am interested in the social role though.
As you said, churches and religious groups tend to fill a rather unique social role, which seems to be different depending on the other societal pressures of the culture.
Perhaps some people have a great desire to belong to a religious group as part of their psychological makeup, while others do not for the same reasons. Some people might be drawn to religion, any religion, because they need something to fill that social role.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: I'm interested in following it on another path, that of addiction. The question is how much do you NEED religion. [1]Is religion addictive? [2]Is religion a drug in some senses? [3]Do people feel physical withdrawal symptoms if they quit religion? [4]Can religion be addictive then? Either from a social and psychological standpoint, or even from a physical standpoint. [5]Do religious experiences cause people to seek out further religious experiences? [6]Can you get hooked on God? [numbers added for easier reference]
I will answer from my personal perspective, because I don’t know what “people feel/believe”
[1][4]I think religion can become “addictive” but only at a psychological level. And the main factor is the “tradition”, the fact that “society” does it so you have to do it too.
[2]I see religion as a “drug” but from a different perspective. Not because it might become addictive, but because it might cause a certain effect of “euphoria” (again alcohol related analogy). That becomes a real problem when it affects in a negative way the perception of reality at a practical level. Drinking [not as a metaphor] might disable you as a driver, “drinking religion” [as a metaphor] might disable you as a critic of the rational truth.
[3]I have no idea.
[5]I don’t know if one of the effects of religious experiences is to seek out further religious experiences because I don’t recall having any such experiences (I don’t count “forcibly assisting at religious rites” as such experiences).
[6]I can’t get hooked on God because I’m an atheists in the sense that for me that “particular God” does not exist.
A.
PS: Having read these questions, I have some more of my own, about the “euphoric” effect of religion: Do you think it is real (the “euphoric” effect)? Do you think it is something negative or positive?
Posts: 1154 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting questions, suminonA and MightyCow. I shouldn't be answering, as I'm not really here (I have too much else on my plate) but you've piqued my interest.
I quite agree with you that religion can be like a drug--that ecstatic experiences can alter a person's perceptions, and even that they can be addictive. The interesting part is that precisely for that reason, my church has done its best to eliminate such experiences from its worship; they are not considered to be real or valid expressions of the Divine. Obviously, I tend to think of such things in negative terms, even though my reasons for doing so are probably different from, say, TomDavidson's.
In the last couple of years my work schedule, combined with increasing sleep difficulties, has cut me off more and more from the social aspect of my faith. I can no longer attend morning worship, and more and more often I sleep through evening worship as well, or have to miss it to do other things. Curiously, this does not appear to have damaged my faith, although it was often suggested that it would when I was younger. I am having some difficulties with my worldview, but they tend to have more to do with other things, like my loss of faith in technological progress and the future of humanity, which my church and personality prepared me to believe in. (See my very brief remarks on the Global Warming thread.)
It's difficult to say how much my particular beliefs influence my personality, or are influenced by it. I was raised in a faith that, while fundamentalist, at least nominally (and often more than that) values reason, order, and the concrete. (It was, at one point when Western culture was differently organized, a sort of half-step between fundamentalism and free-thought--a rejection of traditional authority and of modern experiences of the supernatural without denying that the supernatural was objectively real and had once been more visible. Since then, its old moorings have obviously shifted.) I have a personality that fits in well with such a belief system--including a clever, flexible intelligence, a tendency to think in terms of the concrete and the absolute, a reverence for God combined with a sarcastic irreverence toward all things human, and a profound, deep-seated belief in free will over determinism in all its forms. Surely some of this would have been part of me no matter what faith or lack thereof I grew up with--and surely some of it is a product of the faith I did grow up with.
Posts: 1114 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Do religious experiences cause people to seek out further religious experiences? Can you get hooked on God?
I think so, but I don't think it's bad. It's like getting hooked on friendship, or on being loved, or that great feeling of finishing a race or a painting. Communing with the Lord and having spiritual experiences is part of the good stuff in life. Our brains also change when we laugh, or when we see pictures of people we love. I don't think that means that laughter and love are addictive, but that we are wired - for whatever reason and in whatever way - to be happier for those things.
I know that if I go for a while without having a spiritual experience, I miss it. I'll seek for them. Part of the reason I love the Book of Mormon so much is because I consistently am spiritually fed by reading it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
I think so, and I think it can be bad, like any mainly emotional addiction. Being addicted to exercise, gambling, chocolate, or Survivor is exactly as bad as being addicted to God.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:I know that if I go for a while without having a spiritual experience, I miss it. I'll seek for them. Part of the reason I love the Book of Mormon so much is because I consistently am spiritually fed by reading it.
This is the same reason I like to visit museums, monuments, mountain tops and places of grand architecture. I think it's largely the same sensation, just with different triggers.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Eh, if you're addicted to God in such a way that it causes you to neglect your other responsibilities - i.e. family, work, etc. - then I would suggest that you're addicted to something other than God. God wants us to have a balance, and to keep our commitments to others (provided we haven't made a promise to kill someone, or something:)). If you just love God and want to do things His way, you'll be more committed to keeping your word and being responsible and all that ... so I don't think you could call that addicted, in the sense that "addicted" is used to define behavior that is habitual that you can't stop even though it causes harm to your family/job/etc.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
[3]Do people feel physical withdrawal symptoms if they quit religion?
I know that I did not, and neither did my wife. Nor for many other ex-Mormons that have now become agnostic or atheist that I am in contact with. But, we did go for a while missing our "Sky Daddy". It sure is nice to think that when life gets tough, there is some all powerful, benevolent being that might make things all better. But, if and when you realize there is not one, you deal with it. There are many benefits to believing that a Sky Daddy doesn't exist as well.
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Eh, if you're addicted to God in such a way that it causes you to neglect your other responsibilities - i.e. family, work, etc. - then I would suggest that you're addicted to something other than God.
That's only because your personal opinion of God is such that it eliminates the possibility. Technically, people can't get addicted to chocolate, either; they get addicted to the endorphins, and associate those endorphins with chocolate. Ditto God.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Friends? Reading? Sunshine? Your family? Some people hate being away from their family for more than a few days. Is that addicted in the same way that being addicted to Survivor is addicted?
I think whether or not you think liking and wanting religion is a harmful addiction has more to do with one's opinion of religion than of the actual behavior. There is so much more nuance to it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Isn't "addiction" the tricky word here? I seem to recall that, clinically, addiction was diagnosed when the impact on someone's life was negative.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Note: in the context of this thread, "addiction" is not used "by default" in its clinical sense. Please feel free to specify the conotation that you give to that word, in order to avoid misunderstadings
quote:Originally posted by suminonA: [1][4]I think religion can become “addictive” but only at a psychological level. And the main factor is the “tradition”, the fact that “society” does it so you have to do it too.
I used “becoming an addiction” meaning something that becomes a habit before one being able to make a rational decision about. There are positive addictions, and there are negative ones. Keeping a good hygiene would be quite a positive addiction for example.
While I’m not saying that “being addicted to religion” is something bad, I don’t see it as a particularly useful habit for myself.
quote:I think whether or not you think liking and wanting religion is a harmful addiction has more to do with one's opinion of religion than of the actual behavior.
No. In some doses, religion can be a "helpful" addiction. In others, it can ruin lives and minds.
In the same way, even the "positive addiction" suminonA listed above -- "keeping good hygiene" -- can quickly become harmful and obsessive if not moderated.
While it's true that moderation in all things is a good strategy anyway, there are many things -- like religion, fattening food, and sex -- which it's easier to become harmfully addicted to. And most people who are "addicted" to religion are, in my opinion, harmfully so.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't believe that at all. That only makes sense if you believe that needing a religion is inherently a bad thing.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think needing anything that's otherwise optional can be a bad thing, if you need it to the exclusion of other healthy things. Many religious people, not realizing that religion can be harmful, indulge in it to excess.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
The more powerful something is, the more potential for harm - and the more potential for good. Sex is a good example of that. And some religions are "healthier" than others - this is sometimes true generally and sometimes specific to the individual. Food is a good analogy for that. Some foods are healthy or unhealthy for most people, some foods that are healthy or harmless for some people are deadly for others.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What are you defining as excess? Having religion as opposed to volleyball? Fewer museums because of time spent in church? Choosing no alcohol over a nice chianti?
Those things are all choices. Choosing something different doesn't make it a bad choice.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Katie, do you honestly not know many people who have let their religion eat away at their soul, until it's replaced or significantly reduced their capacity for both thought and enjoyment of anything else?
Perhaps your concern over the word "addiction" is causing you to defend something that, at the end of the day, isn't really defensible and doesn't actually require your defense.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know many, many more people whose lives are enriched and better for their religion. I suspect I know more of them than you do. I can see for myself that the intelligent, great people I know that have chosen their religion many, many times in their lives are blessed instead of crippled by it.
I think your pool of experience is inadequate to make the call.
Is this going to be one of the instances where you tell me that my experience is wrong? That all those people are actually very unhappy and lying about it?
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, I am not defending an excess of religion for someone for whom it is unhealthy anymore than I would defend eating a ton of sugar bombs for a diabetic.
(Whoops! Probably not addressing me. Still, kat is making some very good points.)
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
I'm almost certain that you do. But that's not the question, is it? The question is whether over-attachment to religion can be a harmful addiction, and whether this harmful addiction is common.
That some people benefit from a random belief in anything is completely irrelevant. Moreover, that some people enjoy their addictions is also rather irrelevant to the question of whether or not they're harmful.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
You haven't defined addiction, harm, or shown anything to prove what you're saying beyond contending that devotion to religion is, in itself, harmful. Which is what you started with. It's a circle. That doesn't make sense.
It's like me saying that alcohol is bad because everyone I know who drinks it is a drunk. That's not as much of a problem with alcohol as it is an inadequate sample.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
To continue my analogy (I like this analogy!) you are like someone who has seen too many people with heart disease get sick from eating bacon and too many people die from overeating sugar. Now you are running around screaming, "Don't eat that!" at every opportunity.
It is completely understandable, but you have to understand that many of us make really healthy choices about our religion.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:you have to understand that many of us make really healthy choices about our religion
More precisely, I should understand that many people think they make really healthy choices about religion. If we're going to run with this analogy, it's like I've known these people for years and have slowly watched them grow fat on bacon and sugar, and every now and then point out, "Hey, um, should you be eating that?" And they say, "yes! I watch my weight! Bacon and sugar make me happy!"
And it's rude to point out that they're getting fat, so I don't -- settling instead for the lesser offense of suggesting that their bacon might not be the health food they believe it to be.
Katie's reacting histrionically because she's thinking that I'm saying that all religion is bad. She's wrong. She's had a stick up a certain nether region for ages about this, ever since I had the temerity to disagree with her on a specific point, and she's worried ever since that I'm out gunning for all religious people, everywhere. It's a ludicrous fear, and it makes her overreact.
But that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that religion is addictive (indirectly, through psychological factors, and directly, through physical chemical triggers), and that this addiction not only can be harmful but, for most people who're addicted to it, is harmful.
If she's offended by this because she believes herself to be harmlessly "addicted" to religion, that's unfortunate (or, rather, fortunate, if indeed her addiction is a positive force in her life) -- but ultimately not relevant to the discussion. If she's arguing because she doesn't think people can be harmfully addicted to religion, she's flat-out wrong.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see that katharina is trying to strongly argue that even if religion has a quality that causes people to want more and more of it, that religion is on the whole a positive experience, so wanting a lot of it is good.
That may be true, but it is also true that generally people with an addiction do not want to admit that they have a problem. I asked about the connection between religion and addiction, because I think there are strong ties between the two.
Enjoying religion, participating in religion, being fulfilled by religion, those are all fine. Eating bacon is fine, drinking wine is fine, working out is fine. The problem with any fulfilling activity is that humans have a tendency to seek pleasure, and justify it by extreme means if necessary.
Do you have a few slices of bacon for breakfast, or are you 500 lbs and growing because you eat unhealthy food to excess? Do you enjoy an alcoholic beverage now and then, or do you get stumbling drunk every night? Do you enjoy going to church and sharing fellowship with your religious community, or do you neglect other aspects of your life and drive away people who aren't part of your faith in an attempt to further your religious experience?
The aspect of religion being addictive which interests me most is that it's controlled and directed. The Coors Brewing Company doesn't tell its customers that if they want another beer, they need to go bomb the Miller plant.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: More precisely, I should understand that many people think they make really healthy choices about religion. If we're going to run with this analogy, it's like I've known these people for years and have slowly watched them grow fat on bacon and sugar, and every now and then point out, "Hey, um, should you be eating that?" And they say, "yes! I watch my weight! Bacon and sugar make me happy!"
And sometime we are saying, "Geez, Tom, it's not bacon, it's a nice veggie stir fry! Waddya want me to starve!?"
I had (and it isn't like we have a huge history) the impression that you think all religion is bad. I'm glad I am wrong. I think this misperception is similar to how Dag is misperceived. You do seem to jump in on one "side" of the religion discussion more often.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, this is not histrionic. I resent the mis-characterization of me.
I think you're wrong. I think you're spectacularly and unfortunately wrong. I think you have a blind side to this, and I think that you are considerably less courteous on this subject than on others.
It's strong enough that I find I usually regret discussing religion with you at all. That makes me sad, but it's better than this.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think you're spectacularly and unfortunately wrong.
About religion in general, or about whether people can become negatively addicted to religion? Because I'll always freely admit the possibility that I'm wrong about religion in general.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since we are talking about possible addictions to god, I thought some of you might be interested in this experiment. Two people agree to give up their "addictions" for the rest of the year and keep a journal about the results. One person's addiction is God; the other person's addiction is psychoactive medications and drugs.
To read how the woman "Robin" is doing letting her addiction with God go look here
To read about how the challenge got started read herePosts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think you're spectacularly and unfortunately wrong.
About religion in general, or about whether people can become negatively addicted to religion? Because I'll always freely admit the possibility that I'm wrong about religion in general.
Well its hard for you to draw conclusions when you have yet to see what a religionless society would be like.
The only state sponsored atheism examples I an think of would be France during the revolution, Communist Russia, and Communist China. Maybe its just a coincidence that all 3 regimes were (and in China's case "are") absolutely terrible.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: And sometime we are saying, "Geez, Tom, it's not bacon, it's a nice veggie stir fry! Waddya want me to starve!?"
Without speaking for Tom, in this context, yes, you should starve. Your veggies were grown in soil fertilised with human bones, and tended by child labour.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
No harm done.![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
]
