archibald wrote: igorfrankensteen wrote:
I added the bold to your remarks, where you detail the reason why I carefully used the phrase " one of
the specific and purposeful reasons." As in not the sole or primary one, for every instance.
I look at the world, as a series of events, followed by problem solving efforts by the subjects of said events. There are several ways that inventing, declaring, supposing, or even postulating magic, can work as a "solution" to serious challenges. No matter where you look, no matter how scientific or logical or political or religious you get, SOMEONE will come along and find a way to use whatever you put in place as your favored solution, to sneak something past, that artificially and dishonestly uses the "nice" reason for your solution, to do something that solves the "problem" THEY happen to see. And it is not at all unusual, for someone else's use of your "solution," to be to gain the reverse result, of the one you intended.
Well then we do not disagree much, and if we do it is probably only in terms of emphasis.
Maybe I am naive, but I tend to think that religions get invented (initially) by the genuinely, deluded religious more so than the disingenuous. That they more often than not get hijacked by the disingenuous for reasons other than true belief (often power-chasing reasons) is something I would see as slightly different.
That said, I am not ruling out that in some cases they may even be invented dishonestly.
I agree, that we seem to agree for the most part. What I am seeing that is a few degrees off from what you said here, is that very few human endeavors start from a single source, targeting a single goal, and then proceed directly towards that goal. Instead, they tend to be interactive and evolutionary in how they progress.
With something like a religion or a philosophy, what I see is that it is rare that anyone STARTS with the goal of creating a comprehensive vision of the world, combined with a universal guide for living. Instead, they proceed more organically, with immediate targets changing as circumstances change, and with modifications and refinements added in often almost random ways.
I suggest as a study example for us, not an official mainstream religion, but one of the more recent "religions" which have sprung up in modern times.
For example, the religions which grew out of diets. Veganism started out as people trying to either lose weight, or increase health, by altering what they eat, to avoid meat. An initial thought for many, wasn't anything moral or magic, it was just the sense that meat seemed greasy and made them feel worse than vegetables did. At some point, it occurred to someone to extend the prohibition from meat itself, to anything related to meat.
Although SOME real science was involved from the beginning, with the decision to go meatless, most people didn't want to dedicate their lives to the deep study of the physics of digestion and human cell structure, they just wanted to lose a few pounds, and feel more like dancing. So the science part of eating took a back seat, and simplified notions were scribbled in, to guide anyone else who wanted to join in. People who have trouble motivating themselves for health reasons, but still wanted to try, may have added imaginary MORAL reasons not to eat meat. Others reinforced that vague moral notion, with magic, by declaring various fantasy reasons not to eat meat, were the reason why some people who eat meat have less fun than they thought they were having.
Then various private enterprise food providers joined in, seeing a new market for their goods, and some honestly proclaimed themselves vegans, while others simply pretended to believe in the magic, in order to increase sales.
As others with alternate motivations joined the enterprise, some of the "originator/leaders" may begin to rebel against their ideas being used to promote ingenuous, and often "incorrect" versions of veganism, by writing up "official guidelines." Bibles of veganism.
We often see in modern times, small clusters of people who have grasped on to some faddish idea, and taken emotional comfort from it's simplicity, to arrange for the betterment of their neighborhood, and the best interests of their children, to turn their simplified ideas into a legal system. They don't turn religion in to government duplicitously at all. They do it either (or both) to help more people benefit from the ideals faster, or to make it that much easier for them to live as they want to (by requiring all food vendors to cater to their expectations, for example). They want to protect their children from being mislead back to eating meat, or whatever, so they vote to give the government control over schooling, advertising content, entertainment concepts, and so on.
The original idea, was just to save money on meat, or to lose weight. But one thing lead to another, side issues were introduced, and the original core idea of living free and living well, became an oppression.