if there were no religion.. and everyone was athiestic..

People would still find a multitude of ways to be evil.


I thought about this recently when someone asked me if i could have one wish come true and it was to banish all belief in a deity. Then i figured that religion is just another excuse for being bloodthirsty, greedy evil bastards.

of religeous orientation. I know plenty of very good people of strong christian faith. However, I'm of the opinion that their goodness has nothing to do with their religeon. They'd be good people if they were atheists, or hindus, or wiccans.

Maybe religeon is an amplifier. It reinforces people's behavior, because they tend to imagine that their religeous principles are backing them up.

As an amplifier, it may tend to increase the frequency of positive-feedback loops in society. That's probably not a good thing.

Of course there would still be evil people. But a world in which everyone was an atheist would have less evil in it than this world does, I'm convinced.

If it weren't religion, they'd find another way.

differently.

Currently, we see behavior in terms of character, such that the actions of a person cannot be separated from their personalities, their philosophies and their drives. Thus, for example, we in the West characterize suicide bombers as evil, instead of viewing their actions as evil and destructive, and accepting that their motivations (freedom to believe as they please, freedom from dictatorship, freedom from oppressive, oil-seeking, multinational corporations, whatever) are responsible and their goals are reasonable.

I think we are unable to separate actions from motive and philosophy because the Religions of the Book, and especially orthodox Christianity, teach that personality, motivation and faith are linked, and behavior is but an outward expression of personality and faith.

If behavior and personality were separated, such that we defined actions, rather than people as good or evil, perhaps we would stand a better chance of understanding what motivates people to actions that can be described as evil.

Pcat

That the diversity of beliefs essentially forced a tolerant social system. If any philosophy takes hold as the dominant social order then anything beyond its scope will be considered an abomonation. There is a strength in diversity.

No one told you to do it. You'd have to take responsibility.

Fear, guilt, greed, lust....the toolbox would still be full.

It's like the argument that the world would be less violent if women "ran things." I know - and so do you - any number of women who give the lie to that one. We all hold the capacity for good and evil.

Most issues can be negotiated. Money, land, rights, trade routes, etc. All these can eventually be negotiated. Dogmatic authoratative religions (they aren't all that way) cannot compromise their doctrine. It is absolute. There is no room for negotiation.

Add further to the problem the fact that some religions are predatory in nature. They don't just advocate to their own existing members. They actively seek to convert others. These particular systems initiate a form of cultural warfare that inevitibly leads to real wars.

Yes people can fight about nearly anything. But once you place a system of thought that is inflexibile and doctrinare in nature you have created a focal point that will lead to conflict eventually.

Incidently the methodology of authoratative religions are not exclusive to religion. Some forms of political and social structures can wind up using the same methodologies. The form of Marxism practiced in the USSR purged all competing belief systems. Any that did not agree with it were reeducated or eradicated. When the science of evolution contended with it pressure was applied to force the scientists into compliance. It is not too great a strecth to suggest that this system was perhaps a form of religious dogma as well.

and methodology is similiar because, what works, works. You can't improve on the old family recipe, so to speak. Powermongers wield the same tools.

I was speaking more to the evil religion is capable of inflicting on its own followers, rather than in conflict with other belief systems.

And a BIG one at that.

"social darwinism" can get ugly.

...to be happy. Which is the essence of "evil".