/polpol/ - Politically Incorrect Discussion

How about you first define what you mean by "good" before we continue, because if you ask such a vague question with such vague terminology you're not going to get anything resembling a decent answer.

>>15361

>Senaca is an authoritative spokesman for all religion

Is he speaking of the polytheistic tribal religions, or is he also speaking about Stoic attitudes toward God/the Divine? Is he speaking about the Orphic mystery cults also?

>>15365

I don't know the context of the quote, but I'll offer my perspective. From the quote alone, it appears that Seneca isn't commenting on the validity of religion, but instead on its political implications.

Organised dogma, such as which we have these days, can be applied firmly to that quote. Common people will accept the dogma as it aids them in their lives. Wiser people will reject the dogma purely on the basis of its inconsistencies, and yet delve no further. The ruling class has, perhaps, the most extensive understanding of the dogma and the rationale behind it, and employ it to uphold whatever political ideal they stand behind.

This is as true of any ideology as it is for religious ones. The Church comes to mind, as does leftism.

As for whether or not "religion" as an umbrella term is "good", well let's just say that we could write many tomes on that.

>>15365

Please destinguish between faith in god in general and religion as an idiology. You can believe in god, yet be unreligious.

I do believe in god, but I would never see myself as part of a religion.

The god you believe in is a mirror image of yourself and thus it is evolving as yourself evolves.

As soon as you accept the stubborn mindset of a religion, you limit your own belief.

Therefore I would say religion is not always a bad force, but it limits the minds of those who follow it. It makes them easily controlable and unresonable.

It is often abused for bad intentions.

>>15358

Are weapons a force for good? Are the police?

You see, it is a double edged sword.

Atheism is nihilism in denial, and we won't reach anything by dishonesty.

>… is religion a force for good?

No.

It's a falsehood and form of social control. The elements in it which make societies cohesive can and do exist independent of religion.

Also, don't delude yourselves.

There is no God.

We all end up in the same place Joseph Stalin, Mother Theresa, and the paedophile down the street when we die: non-existent unconscious oblivion.

>>15457

>It's a falsehood and form of social control.

I know you're not really going to change your mind on the "falsehood" part, although it isn't really relevant, but on the social control aspect you seem to imply that the impact religion has is due to mysterious hooded men and not self-restraint. On top of that not all religions have a social hierarchy, some of them don't even have a spiritual hierarchy.

>The elements in it which make societies cohesive can and do exist independent of religion.

Well if you have a broken leg and are using crutches and you throw away one because you only NEED one, then you are only shooting yourself in the foot and making yourself much more vulnerable to the situation. It is like trying to make a nationalist country without race-realism, it is possible but that doesn't mean it is going to be as long-lasting. It not being the ONLY cohesive element does not mean you can just drop it whenever you feel like it.

>>15458

>Also, don't delude yourselves.

>There is no God.

You do know that nobody was claiming this, right?

>We all end up in the same place Joseph Stalin, Mother Theresa, and the paedophile down the street when we die: non-existent unconscious oblivion.

Except that death is irrelevant for what we are discussing in the thread, unless of course you are talking about suicide cults, which nobody here is.

>>15458

>There is no God

At last I truly see