Do I need a religion?
I think that everyone should honour somebody, to look up to someone. Even if it’s not a God, that’s completely fine. It’s okay to believe in the scientific theories but like I stated, there should always be a person in your life that you worship, that you learn from and respect.
You have but two choices;
A) Deduce reality and wisdom on your own.
B) Respect and hold faith in what someone else has told you.
If you aren’t really good at (A) and aren’t trying really hard to become good at it, then I recommend (B).
That’s actually really good advice… I thought any thread with the word ‘religion’ would instantly spiral downwards 
One should never become a sheep, especially not willingly. It’s better to work with what you have than let somebody manipulate you because you’re scared to think for yourself. I say that if you’re interested in the subject enough you can attain at least a basic level of knowledge about it irrelevant of your intelligence.
If you ask whether you need religion or not it means you don’t NEED it, it isn’t necessary to you like it may be for some people who can’t imagine their lives without it.
If you intend to study about a religion I would encourage you to learn basics of logic and critical thinking if you haven’t already, otherwise you may end up brainwashed by the first religion you encounter just because you don’t know better.
I believe in having role models and looking up to people. There is no better way to learn to be than from others. I don’t think you should worship anyone or put them on too high a pedestal, but recognize strengths and weaknesses and be inspired. We all do this to some extent anyway, take example from others. It is just another way to learn. Honor that which proves useful and fulfilling. This is part of life.
James advice is perfect. There is no third way. I have said the same thing some time back in a different thread.
But, it is very important to choose a role model wisely. That is where people make usually make mistake.
While choosing a role model, it is more important to pay attention to the intent, rather than knowledge or achievement.
People try to judge others more from their knowledge/achievement/status and pay less attention to the intent.
with love,
sanjay
As usual, you are again making mistake here. it is not a question of ego or bravery as you are trying to present.
The hard reality is that a very few have the intent, capacity, patience and wisdom to investigate deeply in person. That requires a lot of dedicated effort and time too. One has to devote a good portion of his life and energy into that. It is not a cup of tea of an average person. Investigating does not mean reading wiki page or googling for some minutes.
Secondly, odds are in the favor that he may end up with wrong and incomplete conclusions. But, after that, as he has been put some effort in that, his ego would make him blind and he would never able to accept truth, even if he ever comes across with that. That situation is even more dangerous that becoming a follower.
Ego is more dangerous and harmful than ignorance.
with love,
sanjay
Atheris made some good points.
C) (B) until you’re competent at (A).
D) (A) until you find an acceptable choice for (B).
E) Forgo understanding and wing it.
Needing religion is why most folks have it. But that doesn’t make it any more demonstrable.
zinnat13, it has nothing to do with ego, merely with the fact that willingly allowing yourself to be manipulated and ruled never ends up good, the other party will just exploit you and put you in an even worse position than you would be in had you done the thinking yourself.
There are “predators” out there just waiting for naive sheeple to make money off of them, now I know some religious people are genuine in their beliefs, I’m talking about people like L. Ron Hubbard and Deepak Chopra.
You don’t have to read every religious book word by word, it’s enough to get to know the general beliefs and evidence presented to assess whether it deserves further studying. Only religious beliefs that satisfy the standard of evidence and aren’t ridiculous prima facie are deserving of a more careful, deeper investigation.
It’s always better to think for yourself, try, fail, try again and repeat until you get it right, or at least less wrong than before. To put all your trust in a single role model is just saying “I give up and hope that somebody else got it right”.
… the voice of fear … the “mind killer”.
..“for sake of the possibility of bad, we must forgo all possibility of good.”
You still are not getting what I am trying to say.
I am not saying that being manipulated is good thing either. But, the question is what other choice one has if he is unable to find the truth on his own, which is true in the case of majority?
You do not have any idea how much dedicated effort and time is required for being a true investigator. It looks simple to you as you said about religions. But, it goes far beyond your imagination.
It takes a lifetime to be true expert in any field, sometimes even that fall short. So, it is impossible that everyone can do that.
[u]Thus, it is better that one should use its wisdom, time and energy in finding a right person to follow. That is a simpler and achievable route.
Otherwise, what will happen that one will not get what he aimed, and as the result, he will miss that also, which was easily achievable. Neither here nor there[/u].
with love,
sanjay
Those who build the great buildings hold faith in the architects of the buildings, else the buildings do not become great. The architects have studied long and hard to ensure that they can be certain in what they design. But they do not do the building.
Either everyone goes to the trouble to become an expert designer (aka “thinker”), or a large percentage merely follow a leader. How many geniuses do you think there are in the world of 6.5 billion people? Only those geniuses would qualify to not be followers. And even they are usually very much followers, merely adding onto what was done before them. If they had no faith and did not follow as they learned, they would never have become geniuses.
Are you a genius? If not, you either follow, pointlessly struggle and gain nothing, or annihilate yourself.
Okay, what constitutes “on your own” ?
If you’ve ever read a book before or learned something from a teacher or an elder, have you done it on your own?
Precisely. You got it right. That is what James and i was trying to explain Atheris but he is so busy with his ego that the term following is troubling him. He is not ready to accept that he has been following others throughout his life without realizing it.
No one on this earth can make anything from the sketch. He has to use/follow all that knowledge that is evolved, conserved and passed on to him through ages. The best or last thing one can do is merely to make some amendments or little additions, not beyond that. Even that little changes requires a lifetime effort.
The perception that someone invented something is mere illusion. In the same way, we do not follow anyone but make our decisions is also an illusion, at least for the majority.
If follwing is the only option, why not accept it and try to do it wisely, instead of living in the illusion of denial to pamper our ego?
Having said that, it is not the case that leaders/innovators cannot make mistakes. They certainly can and history has enough examples of that. But, challenging them for everything and by everyone is more harmful alternative. That would create nothing but chaos. Leave that to those 1% (my guess), they will keep themselves amending to the best of their ability. That is not the perfect solution but the most suitable one under the given circumstances.
with love,
sanjay
K: am I the only one who finds it odd that James would recommend to follow what someone
else has told you.
Kropotkin
Well, there is a reasonable chance that you are the only one who can’t read what James actually said.
“On your own” means that you know actually how and why you believe what you believe.
For example;
Can a square-circle ever be formed?
Do you need a book in order to confidently answer that question? Some people (to my disappointment) actually do. If you don’t, then you formed your believe based upon your own understanding. You might be incorrect and thus it would be wise to have your understanding verified, but at least it really was “on your own” (whether a good thing or bad).
But even if you are in the position of not knowing anything very certainly, as long as you maintain the forethought concerning exactly where you got your opinions and the probabilities involved concerning their accuracy, you are still managing your beliefs “on your own” while gathering data from others. That would be the position of the agnostic until he had enough information to ascertain a certainty from all of the noise. And thus (B) must be used until (A) can be accomplished (if that is the intent).
I don’t know, do you? It would depend on what you are looking for. Many of us already have our “religions” we just don’t realize it.
My religion I would say is nature -------it holds me, binds me to it - religare. I can’t go wrong with it.
Worship is not the same as learning from and respecting. Worship is too strong a word for those two other words. Maybe what you need is a mentor. We learn from and respect our mentors but they cannot be gods to us.
Do we worship our teachers? Perhaps if we do, we haven’t as yet begun to learn anything but i would say that most teachers deserve more respect than what they are given.