All religions equally wrong, but not in same ways

I am a secular humanist. (I even subscribe to Free Inquiry magazine.) It comes as no surprise to me that secular humanism and physics and religion and any other source of human knowledge is faith based.

Other than the "Cogito," the single fact that something exists, there is no system of knowledge that can be derived from a priori principles. One can always ask "Why?" one more time. ("Where did God come from and when?" One ancient religion finds God as an emergent property of primordal Chaos--Where did the Chaos come from?)

As a secular humanist, my "faith" directs me to knowledge that is achieved by empirical examination without supernatural intervention and organized in accordance with systems that are, at least in principle, falsifiable by humans. I have faith that the scientific method and the secular philosophies are a good way to figure out what is going on and to structure a moral life.

What I call "religions" are all the same in that they begin with a premise that is not falsifiable.

Other than that, it seems to me that when a member of a particular religion says that all religions are the same, they almost always mean that all religions are just another way of describing their particular religion. It seems to me to be absolutely clear that there is at least a huge divide between those who belive in a God that is active in human affairs (like Christians?) and those who believe that humans are mere particles recirculating in an impersonal cosmos in accordance with immutable rules (like Bhuddists?).

Love without reason can be blind
Reason without love can be cruel
Religion without sciences is illusion
Sciences without morality is limped
Compassion without wisdom is blurred
Wisdom without compassion is frail
Faith without reason can be delusion
Reason without faith can be misguided
Sciences without consciousness is veiled
Consciousness without mindfulness is lame
Evolution without consciousness is stranded
Consciousness without evolution is ended
The self (individual or collective) are the sources of sufferings
Conquer the self is liberation
The essence of being is consciousness
Consciousness of truth is the ground of existence.

Athena4

You are right about imbued cultural preferences predating "imported" faiths and "imported" forms of governance from democracy to communism still with societies and sometimes difficult to wean from but only through availabilty of mass education and awareness that traditions and practices are plainly wrong - including honour killing, female genital mutilations, feminicides.

The Afghan history and society, as you pointed out, are still among the most tribal, clannish and patriarcal in the world. Not to mention Afghanistan having a history of warring for survival it being the "passage" to conquer the Indian subcontinent apart from being a trade route. And as a "geo-strategically" important state for the Soviet Union before for its "route" to the Indian Ocean during the Cold War, and for the "war on terror" now.

And you are right that it is more challenging for countries to move forward from the medieval age, the barbaric state in a state of armed conflict in their own territory.

Indonesia is a country that has made significant strides for political, economic and social change and development in the last decade when it is less affected by prolonged and major armed conflicts.

"The Afghans are whacked and wacked by decades of armed conflicts and a specific preference for a particular strain of Islamic interpretation. What is the reason for secular Chinese misogynism or sexism?"

Similar reasons - millennia of cultural preference for male children over female children. In Chinese society, the male child/children stay at home and care for the elder parents, where the females marry into their husband's household. As for the Afghans, their repression of women goes back probably even further than the adoption of Islam. Remember that these people lived along the Silk Road, where traders were constantly traveling back and forth, stopping at waystations for rest. A woman alone, or not draped in 20 pounds of fabric, was probably considered to be "fair game" to a trading caravan. Besides, tribal affiliation and paternity were the main status symbols then and now.

I'm not saying that it's right in this day and age. In fact, it's medieval, barbaric, and cuts half of the region's potential economic value. Other countries, like Bangladesh, are making inroads into integrating females into the economic structure. But, one has to look at the entire system, not just the religion, to enact social change.

At the core all religions have one thing in common. A belief in a whole slew of unnatural phenomenon. Each slew may differ from religion to religion, in some cases even overlap. Discussing these religions and trying to make sense of them is just as fruitful and as stupid as to comparing and contrasting Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice" against Alexander Dumas's "Count of Monte Cristo".

When discussing the religions, I cannot get past these superstitious beliefs in the organizing documents (scriptures). Be it be the virgin birth and resurrection of Christians, Parting of the Waters and the Joshua being swallowed by a fish of Judaism, The flying horse or talking bones of Islam, or the many a superstitious beliefs of Hinduism, Jainism, & Buddhism from monster heads swallowing the moon & the Sun to the sweat (or the semen) of an ape swallowed by fish giving rise to a fully grown man. Any memes (all religions are indeed memes) that are based on all these silly theses deserve no respect and have really nothing to teach the 21st century humanity. I sincerely wish and hope that they are all relegated to the dust heap as the humanity as done with Alchemistry, Thorism, Zeusism and thousands of such other memes.

The only thing that all religions have in common is that they are bolx.

It must take quite a misplaced faith to think it right to throw acid on girls for going to school. Obviously, there's still one major group that doesn't think secularism is the test of its morals.

Posted by: WmarkW

*******************************************

Obviously, secularism does not stop folks in China from committing feminicides once scans shows babies are females.

That a misplaced secularism or misplaced sexism?

The Afghans are whacked and wacked by decades of armed conflicts and a specific preference for a particular strain of Islamic interpretation.

What is the reason for secular Chinese misogynism or sexism?

I suspect most religions are pretty much interchangeable to the extent they test themselves secularly. A Unitarian, Reform Jew, liberal Protestant and Pam Taylor/Eboo Patel-type Muslim could probably be comfortable converting to each other's faith.

Differences lie when people reject secular knowledge in favor of the unproven, unprovable, or even worse the disproven.

The Catholic Church has now largely ceeded any secular authority to punish doctrinal error, although they still try to change secular laws on things like abortion. Similarly, few Protestants claim divine authority to enforce doctrinal belief.

(You know where I'm going with this.)

It must take quite a misplaced faith to think it right to throw acid on girls for going to school. Obviously, there's still one major group that doesn't think secularism is the test of its morals.

"As a secular humanist, I hold that all religions are human creations. Though I view them therefore as all equally wrong,"

That is an argument that would just as well be applied to physics, mathematics, philosophy, etc - all human creations and therefore all equally wrong. And if they are all equally wrong, does that mean they are all equally right? I am not sure what scale is being used to define quantity of wrongness here.

hariaum

As a secular humanist, I hold that all religions are human creations. Though I view them therefore as all equally wrong, they are anything but equal in the abundant diversity of concepts each has developed.

- Tom Flynn

*******************************************

Hi there,

So are diversities and no oneness in everything from economics, politics, sociology you name it for it all is, after all, human creation by not yet fully evolved nor genetically engineered to perfection humans. If that is possible.

The United States is dominated generally by Christians and so I tend to discuss and argue religion generally with Christians of varying perspectives. However, on occasion I have found myself in discussions, conversations, arguments, and debates with Jews and Muslims as well. This week’s “On Faith” topic gives me the perfect opportunity to examine a surprising realization: Are all religions the same?

I have a great deal of respect for the Dalai Lama and for historian Karen Armstrong. It is understandable for these them to want to believe that all religions are essentially the same and for everyone in the world to abandon all conflicts and work together in peace and harmony for the good of all humankind. That sounds nice, but it obviously isn’t true.

You can read the rest of my response to this topic:
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-8928-Philadelphia-Atheism-Examiner~y2010m7d7-On-Faith-Are-all-religions-the-same

I will be responding to every issue posted in the 'On Faith' section. If you would like to be notified when my new response is up, please subscribe.

Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....

Aummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

Amennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn..

.
..
...
............................. ._.
........................ ._.|._.|_.
.................... , .|._.| .. |._.|._
.................... | .|. . |. . |. . |._.|
.................... | .|. . |. . |. . |. . |
.................... | .|. . |. . |. . |. . |
................ ._.| .|. . |. . |. . |. . |
........... | .| .) .\ . . ..^ ..^ ..^ . .|
........... | .| . .| . . . . . . . . . .. |
........... | .| . .| . . . . . . . . . .. |
........... |. | . .| . . . . . . . . . .. |
........... \ .\ . . . . . . . . . . . . .|
............ \ .\ . . . . . . . . . . . ../
............. ). \ . . . . . . . . . . .(
............ /. .. \ . . . . . . . . . . .\
.......... / . . . . \ . . . . . . . . . .. \
.......... . . . . . . \ . . . . . . . . . . .\
.......... . . . . . . . \ .. . . . . . . . . ..\
.
..
...
PEACE,PAZ,SHALOM,SALAAM,AHIMSA,MIR, ZHINGYU..
.
..... Credit "JJ" http://onwapo.com

nothingfail mankind and nations like human creation.

is,n human secularism is human creation?

the fact is human being is part and some of this creation universe that we all share.

human being came to this universe,is not the contrary that the universe came after human being lest you say humanbeing created this universe,

and human being came to this universe bare back( ^ )and will depart bare back,lest you say he own or posses any thing in this universe,

the fact is ,
there is one creator for this universe,and there is one religion,no more no less.

for so the creator god love the world he sent one religion,
one more is human creation
one less is human creation
no one is human creation

there is one religion, the rest are delusional creation.