I read an essay online from some dude who thought it was sooner than we think. His view was interesting, obviously fanatical over science and how it will replace blind faith but I couldn't help thinking he was being a little over enthusiastic with his term 'it will happen sooner than later'. In a perfect world, we'll all agree on the same things when it comes to faith. But I dont think that day is coming any time soon. What do ya reckon?
"Where did I say that religion necessarily had to do with a god?"
You did not. But you must admit that the preponderance of religions in existence today involve a supernatural being at it's core.
BTW, you have piqued my interest in the Boyer book. Hopefully a cheap copy is available on Addall.
Then maybe I don't understand what you were trying to say. It seemed pretty clear though. I pointed to the naturalness of religion being about some evolved cognitive mechanisms. You seemed to respond to take issue with the naturalness of religion being about these evolved cognitive mechanisms, pointing to the fact that some cultures don't believe in a god, as if this undermined what I had said. I replied to point out that I never said that every culture on Earth had to believe in a god in order for the naturalness of religion based on our evolved cognitive mechanisms to be true.
I would again point you to Boyer's book. You said, "the preponderance of religions in existence today involve a supernatural being at its core." I would say ALL religions have supernatural entities. But those supernatural entities don't have to be gods. They can be witches, ancestor spirits, "the forest", etc. I would guess, because of the context of your sentence (but forgive me if I'm wrong and please correct me; I don't mean to misrepresent you) that you wrote "supernatural being" to mean a "god". This would have at its core, as Boyer says, the naive impression that all religion has a god or gods. And it would seem to be a strange thing to point out since I just established that not all religions have gods, and that this doesn't undermine the naturalness of religion as based on our evolved cognitive mechanisms. Yes of course I admit that religions feature supernatural entities (but not necessarily a god or gods). But why would that undermine the naturalness of religion based on our evolved cognitive mechanisms? It doesn't.
As for Boyer's book, it looks to be available on Amazon for no more than $11.85, $9.99 for the Kindle edition.
Honestly, I don't really want a world free of religion. All I want is a world in which atheists are respected, and in which people don't vote and lobby based on their superstitious prejudices.
I am going to have to agree with you both. The indoctrination of the kids is terrible in every sense of the word. On the other hand, I have had some dear friends that have become religious and it has helped them dramatically with their issues. I find that a lot of people simply cannot handle or grasp the concept that there is no God, they absolutely need something to believe in. I find them to be harmless, unless they vote of course. It pains me to say this, some people are just better off religious I suppose.
Ah, yes. Forgot about that.
In my sad opinion i feel religion will never be weeded out. its needed by too many of our weaker minded peers. there is literally a section of your brain dedicated to blind faith. what the future will really come down to is the smart leading the dumb. its up to us to lead into the future. Noblesse Oblige my freinds.
My initial thought is that it won't ever go away. Then again I look at how quickly our societies evolve and how far we have come in such a short period of time. It wasn't that long ago that slavery was legal and acceptable. Now we have a black president! Its really quite incredible. I think society will become more secular. However, I don't think the human race will ever come close to finding out all of the mysteries of the universe; so religion will be with us for a long time if not forever.