religious doctrine

Submitted by Claire (United States), Apr 11, 2008 at 03:11

B. Williame wrote: "Religions have been partly founded (nature religions for example) to explain the current inexplicable. ...but now that science has found some sort of answers it might become the next religion..."

I hope not. Scientific method can be used to analyze various attributes of "religious" practices, to determine their efficacy under various conditions, of course.

"Humans and I mean many have life questions. religions gave them answers. some can't understand the complexity of live so they feel better when being able to blame it all to some super being called GOD."

And the problem with the word "God" is that it wreaks of ancient patriarchal cultural doctrine, so it's a distraction for many. If they hadn't turned the metaphor into a rigid belief system, it might have been OK. As it it, just seeing or hearing the word is enough to set off an engram in some people! They need a new term to mean "the unknown force/s"!

Yes, answers, but not always the "truth" and "wisdom" they were actually seeking.

"It's human weakness that causes it all."

Yes, humanness itself is at issue. Autocratic world leaders with power lust will use anything to bring people under their control, and religion has always been an easy thing to coopt for that purpose. It must have had very strong survival value for the species. It worked for President Bush and his sidekick Karl Rove in the U.S. and it works for the leaders of many nations.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".