💾 Archived View for midnight.pub › replies › 2465 captured on 2023-04-20 at 01:58:59. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I think with the topic of atheism and well-being it's not direct causation between religion and well-being, but correlation. I think higher religiosity (of the established ones, not new ones) is usually a proxy for a less broken-down, atomized and disgregated community (they are "backwards"). Religiosity and its disappearance as the community "gets on with the times" are likely a side-effect, and I don't think it can turn back the steam-roller of "social progress". The attempts to bring religiosity back without its material and social roots usually either fail or turn into cults that thrive precisely on the weaknesses of the "progressed" communities.

I personally think only a major, never-seen-before catastrophe can bring human life back to what it's supposed to be. And if such a catastrophe were to happen, millions would die.

Write a reply

Replies

~zampano wrote (thread):

To be clear, the modern Church(es) have done a poor job of adapting to societal change. But I'm worried we as a society (referring to the more general West here) may have over-corrected. Humans are spiritual beings in some form or another, and we need to figure out what forms that should take. Even atheists.

My point is more that when people talk about the de-religioning of a place, they're not just being ridiculous or ignoring reality or whatever. There is a point, and there is a loss, and at the least we need to figure out how to retain the benefits. Again, the big churches especially need major reform (regrettably they're just digging their heels in for the moment).

Catastrophe would certainly bring change, but I don't think we can count on predicting what forms that change will take.