What Happens When You Remove Faith

The other animals don't care about you too much either, but some of them value other animals in a special way. There are plenty of godless animals that don't just fuck each other over or have the attitude "fuck y'all" - instead they help each other out, share food, groom and play together...they help out friends and family, and scorn enemies (either fighting them, or just as a group exiling rule breakers). Either social animals believe in God, or belief in God is irrelevant to adhering to social rules of right and wrong.

No - though they are the easiest example of course. Merecats and horses as well as lions and...many other other animals (notably those that live in social groups) have crime and punishment. Although violence is one punishment, it is a dangerous one to give out. Usually exile from the group is the worst punishment available. Actually, I think an animal values another animal for the benefit of its own genes. I don't think humans differ from any other animal in this regard. Indeed - us humans can definitely conceive of other punishments, even punishments that are seemingly impossible (like a thousand years of burning). If we believe that those punishments will be exacted for doing certain things, we might be more motivated to not do those certain things more than others. That is part and parcel of of having forethought - it works for real punishments too ("hand me the money or I will shoot you").It is likely that animals like merecats don't have the extent of foresight that we do - and they simply cooperate with the group because that is the 'right' thing to do as far as merecatity is concerned. Likewise, most humans go along with societies rules because they are generally the 'right' thing to do as far as humanity is concerned.So even if we are godless animals without any real meaning to our existence, then it is not "fuck y'all" for most humans. If you knew there was no God would you rape and kill your neighbour for the contents of their house? Probably not. If you lived in a small tribe, you might go and kill the other small tribe over there and steal the contents of their house. Not only are you not going to be punished for it, but it doesn't necessarily scream against your humanity to do it. Believing in a God doesn't necessarily stop you - it will only serve as a justification for the way you behave...as evidenced by millennia of religious wars and battles, and religious leaders who go to battle against other tribes/nations and steal their resources. Less compassion for the outgroup is well documented and religous persuasion is only another grouping for their to be an outgroup from.If you weren't religious, maybe you'd be a worse person. Maybe you wouldn't, and instead of talking to god, you'd talk directly to your humanity before you did something ethically questionable.To the OP, personally I think that religion serves us now by providing another layer of grouping. Another us versus them mentality above and beyond the layer of nation. If we removed that grouping by removing faith, we might find that there are less reasons to distrust/hate another group. One less us versus them. People will still find reasons to dislike people of course. And yes, some people may find they are more willing to commit social and legal crimes because they are not deterred by the current potential punishment as opposed to the definite punishment promised through certain faiths, but I think that is a fair price to pay.Now - can we talk about those damned commie-French? I think it wise we don't even begin to discuss the shifty asians or women or shifty asian women. Before we do though, us Stretfordians have got some beef to sort out with the Heaton Park posse.

Normally I don't take their word for it. I might then refer them to a book like the selfish gene. I'd be disgusted with any human who only behaved with humanity out of fear of being punished. Riots and mobs are not about a removal a pressure, but the application of unfair pressure (racism, lack of work, natural disaster). As I also said, violence isn't inherently against our humanity and certain situations will positively engender it - in groups and out groups. Mobs and riots are pure us versus them. Right. As I said - I don't think a local majority of fuck y'alls happens very often in social animals - it tends to lead to a survival problem. If schraf doesn't think humans are a warlike group of savages who care deeply for their own but care less and less for more distant groupings, then I disagree with schraf. However, I don't think schraf means that. Locally humans are very nice to each other. No. It is 'after the event' justification. As in, God would just be the reason we give for either going to battle, or avoiding going to battle. It would only come into it after the mind has been made up. Religion is certainly not the cause of outgrouping. Evolution is the cause of outgrouping. I'm not blaming a label, I'm saying the fewer labels available the better. I don't think the gap will be filled quite the same as religion. I can only think of race as beign a grouping as large as religion. The next is country area (middle east, africa....), we already have that grouping level in operation so its not going to replace religion's layer.With regards to the South Park episode, one has to look at the next level of subtlety in play here. What were the atheists fighting over? What to call themselves. I can believe people killing over paradise and hell and how to get there, but not over what to call themselves. Being aware that you are being good for selfish reasons isn't nihilism of course and it doesn't have to lead that way. If you truly believe in god, it is difficult to simply stop. Personally I took a long journey into disbelief in religion which began with disbelieving in the Christian deity and went through several other religions until religion became less and less important. That way I didn't quit cold turkey, and my a-theist philosophy was allowed to mature. I think fear of punishment is the most selfish reason for good behaviour going. I agree that there will be plenty of other things to fight over. Like those communists, the French, and shifty asian women. We fight over them already - I can't see any disadvantages to remvoving one reason to fight over something, and only advantages to be had.

Because when those people think they can get away with something, they'll stab you in the back. Literally. I haven't seen that. Most of the time, when the going gets shitty, humans form tight knit gangs or groups. Maybe it does, for the little decisions. But for the biggies, the 'should we kill that tribe over there that are building weapons with which to kill us?' type decisions...God becomes a justification for either running or fighting. Well no. Animals don't just respond to negative reinforcement but you can do better to train them using positive reinforcement. I think the biggest issue isn't religion - but faith.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

Why should you feel bad about killing them if God existed? I don't remember the Abrahamic God giving a crap about animals. Most people feel worse when the animal they kill is cute or pretty. This may have roots in paternal/maternal instincts. I don't feel bad about killing a cow for my shoes but I do feel bad about killing my cat. My cat is part of my family and I am responsible for taking care of it. It has a role similar to a child and it should be obvious why an animal would care and protect such a creature. Why would they kill you all the same? It would be against their instincts in general to kill you without reason (it is dangerous physically and socially). Some people might decide to kill you - but that happens anyway (either with or without a god) - why? Because occasionally it is advantageous to kill a potential competitor - there is probably some kind of equilibrium level of betrayers versus cooperators with most people being cooperators.This kind of thing gets studied in game theory - see iterated prisoner dilemma for more information. Even better, let's raise a family of about 80-120 wild-people away from civilization, and see if they are bad to one another or if they are good to one another. We have done this (see native tribes throughout the world), and we've learned that they are good to each other and bad to others.

One of the most important things that comes away from it is that sometimes the most selfish way to act is to be nice, retaliatory, forgiving and non-envious.In the normal prisoner's dilemma the selfish thing to do would be to always betray...but real life is more like the IPD than the non-iterated version. Being an 'other' I'd probably try to avoid them. Those tribes have have laws n'stuff as well as punishment. It wasn't that long ago that if someone from those tribes came into contact with us enlightened city dwellers...we'd hang 'em as soon as enslave their children.And those same enlightened city folk, had you asked them were God fearing church goers. Moreso than today! It isn't God that sets us apart from this tribe - it is an inherited culture. That culture includes religion of course, but it does not rely on the presence of religion.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

Then I'd probably try and integrate myself with them and become one of them. Right - and that separates every culture from other cultures. A difference that has been lethal in almost all of human history, gods or no gods. My religion doesn't involve avoiding a strange outgroup. That is based on the observation of what strange outgroups do to outsiders.If you alter any part of a culture, you alter behaviour. That's what culture is - inherited ways of behaving since religion is a part of culture, naturally by changing religion you can affect a change in behaviour.Of course, the existing culture is just as likely to change the introduced religion.

Yes. I'd either shed my own culture, or pretend to be part of theirs. I'd either become as good as them or remain as good as I am. Which takes me back to our discussion earlier. The addition of gods is just another cultural separator. I've not seen anyone surprise about this. I have not seen anyone disgusted by this either. I have seen people who are disgusted with people whose only cultural guide to morality is religiously instilled fear and that the removal of that fear would strip them of any of their morality. Those kinds of people have no compassion it seems, only fear.Also - just because religion can change a culture and affect change on a culture's morality, that does not mean that religion is necessary to having a morality. There are other cultural influences that can influence morality, but that isn't always the case. We can look at other cultures and see that faith is the dominant cultural influence - and those cultures are repugnant to our sensibilities. The less influence religion has on culture the more enlightened our culture tends to call it. We can watch this in full with a history of the decline of the power of the church in Europe, or with the decline in science in the middle east.In the West - religion is still there, but its influence on morality tries to take us back a generation or two in what the rest of the cultural morality is doing. The church is generally a bit behind the times, whether it is women priests or contraception they generally follow after culture, but keep a respectable distance from the 'immoral standards of today'.As a fan of progression, it should be plain why I think faith should continue declining until its influence is negligible. Sure - if we snap our fingers and faith just vanished, there'd be a lot of confused and upset people. After all, just because they have lost their faith, it doesn't mean they have gained rationality.However, as secular cultural influences continue to overshadow faith's influence I see a society with less needless barriers and a bright future.I think faith and religion were a necessary part of our cultural evolution, and without much culture to influence behaviour a society needs religion to bond and remain cohesive. It is difficult to see our society without faith, but as the secular cultural bonds become stronger the religious glue will become unnecessary and society will happily function as a good and just one (or not - we're still emotive apes with an appetite for destruction and it'll all end in tears).