Why are you backwards and don't believe in God?

I'm religious but this is a fallacious argument OP

>>1691678
2% are atheist senpai.
but there are still religions like buddhism, jainism, taoism, hindu sects, etc etc, that dont believe in god, or dont require the belief in a god.
In buddhism's case, they dont require a belief in a god because caring about how or why the universe exists is unnecessary and clouds the mind from mindlessness.
So even if god created everything, there isnt always a reason to care or for it to matter, or be applicable to anything.

>>1691688
Buddha is an incarnation of God according to the Srimad-Bhagavatam

>>1691678
If nothing can create itself then what created god?

Most statistics on religion are bogus because religion doesn't really lend itself to quantification.

To say "x number of people are Jewish" inherently leads itself to an essentialization of what Judaism is. When actual research is done in the field, it becomes clear that Judaism (which of course I'm just using as an example, this applies to all religions) lacks any kind of essential characteristic.

Basically we can't know how many people belong to a religion since we don't have a quantifiable unit of measurement to assess any religion

>>1691694
How many Buddhists pay attention to that text?

The idea of a religious canon is almost entirely exclusive to the abrahamic faiths

>>1691707
>>1691707
It isn't about how many are part of a religion, but utilizing the information of that religious knowledge in your own life. There is much more to Judaism than the Torah and the Old Testament.

>you have to be religious in order to believe in god
xD

>>1691715
http://www.salagram.net/Buddha-SB.html
>Then, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, the Lord will appear as Lord Buddha, the son of Aïjanä, in the province of Gayä, just for the purpose of deluding those who are envious of the faithful theist.

Those who were using the Vedas were sacrificing many animals, and under the disguise of atheism, Buddha preached the Dharma, many of the principles he taught are still in line with the Vedas and the Gita. Understanding Buddhism opens up a new understanding for Christianity. The nature of Brahmanism is also apparent in faiths like Judaism.

>>1691721
Yes yes the Buddhism/"""Hinduism""" split mirrors the development of Christianity in many ways blah blah. That's entry level imo.

My point is that you can't point to the ideas of any specific Buddhist text as also the ideas of some holistic notion of the "Buddhist faith" since that doesn't exist.

>>1691774
If you want Buddhist teaching to work for you, you have to have faith that what the Buddha says is true. It is still a faith, there are many schools of Buddhism, and you must have faith in the idea that the Buddhist's of the other side will assist you. All belief is in faith, and there is an amount of faith in every belief. Buddhist teachings are religious in nature, and Buddha as an incarnation holds the key that you are learning the same process that religion does teach. That nirvana is multi and is salvation and is paradise.

>>1691678
Why in the fuck wouls I care which metaphysical views the general population holds? They don't even know what the words metaphysics is.

Among those formally trained philosophy, the vast majority are atheists.

>>1691794
Where are they then? It seems like everyone who knows a bit of philosophy is not an atheist and on places like /r/badphilosophy I see them constantly mocking atheists

>>1691678
>thou must walk with the herd, sheep
Just awful OP.

File: 1472976791893.jpg (47KB, 405x270px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 405x270px

>>1691823
>It seems like everyone who knows a bit of philosophy is not an atheist and on places like /r/badphilosophy I see them constantly mocking atheists

>people who visit reddit are now knowledgeable philosophers

I bet you believe that morality and the categorical imperative exist too, you troglodyte.

>>1691793

Here is the deal. I'm not a Buddhist, but I have read a good deal of Buddhist writing.

Buddhism itself it not incompatible with other religions,

It does not teach believe in Gods or even reincarnation in a sense.

At least in the works I read it simply stated certain facts about observations about how the mind and emotions work.

This may be pushing it but I have a feeling you can be an atheist and a Buddhist without violating the tenants of Buddhism as it doesn't tell you to worship anything or believing in any God.

At the same time, I feel that you could also be a Christian and Buddhist at the same time.

Buddhism is vague like that so I suppose maybe that is why it works well.

>>1691823
>reddit

Embarrassing.

Meanwhile, here's an actual survey about professional philosophers from all over the world.

http://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl

>>1691688
That is a good point my fellow anon. However, most creators are the jealous type, and most do have a place of damnation for unbelievers. Would it not be better to attempt to understand as many religions as you can, and therefore choose the one you deem the most true. Therefore giving yourself a better chance at not suffering for eternity? I like most faiths because they seem to not only provide salvation and hope that this world isn't crap for no reason at all. but if I am wrong in the end, i would have had a good guide to live my life by.

>>1691697
is it not better to believe that a God had created himself, rather than molecules spontaneously generating themselves. After all, one of the laws of thermodynamics (forget which one)
Matter can not be created or destroyed.
God is not matter nor is he bound by things that exist.

>>1691688
>Buddhism is atheistic

This myth again

Buddha teached the gods and was praissed by them, and the buddhist countries are filled with shrines for the gods.

>>1691946

Can you cite the Buddhist texts that say this?

Otherwise I can't really say that its false by omission as the onus of proof is on you?

>>1691707
But we can conjecture, vividly and justifiably, on a whim, that a VAST, and almost complete majority of people have faith in some religion.
And to be honest, Judaism, and pretty much every faith are quite distinct and probably have the most essential characteristic of all characteristics in this world.

>>1691946
>phd in philosophy
>doctor of philosophy in philosophy

philosophy is officially redundant and dead

>>1691720
yes I know anon, religious is a bad word to use. I just thought it would appeal to more people if i used such a word. Having a faith is the perfect word.

>>1691793
Exactly. People ask for proof of a faith. But they must understand that to have faith in a God, means to believe that they are there even though one can not sense them with worldly senses. If there was proof, it would be called science.

>>1691678
1% owns 99% of the wealth.
2% owns 100% of the intellect.

*tips le fedora*

>>1691964
>actly. Peop

But there is scientific proof that meditation is good for you.

>>1691794
philosophy. please tell me you didn't go to a university to become "formally trained" to make conjectures about the being that we call existence. Thats even worse than a sociological major.

>>1691956
Mahasamaya Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.20.0.than.html

Āṭānāṭiya Sutta
https://suttacentral.net/en/dn32

Sakkapañha Sutta
http://www.palicanon.org/en/sutta-pitaka/transcribed-suttas/majjhima-nikaya/136-mn-82-rahapla-sutta-on-rahapla.html

And so on.

>>1691831
it is better to be a sheep if the only other choice is a cooked lamb chop to be fed to the devil for eternity.

>>1691975

Can you summarize your argument? I could read all three walls of text, but I might come to a different assumption than you.

>>1691856
from what I've witnessed. Buddhism is the best solution for leading the most hardcore atheist to God in the end. It is kind of like a middle man, a training ground, kindergarden if you will. I like it

>>1691970
absolutely. meditation is taken on by other faiths in different forms too.

>>1691966
what "intellect"
most of the leading "intellectuals" are faith affiliated individuals

and what does wealth matter. can you take it with you when you are dead?

>>1691981
>Claim buddhism is atheistic
>Disagree with him
>Ask buddhsit texts agreeing with me
>Give him the texts
>m-muh i can't read i don't wan't to know the turh that buddhism isn't the fedora's religion


Buddha discussing with Sakka the lord(in buddhism) of the Gods and Thirty-three other gods,

1. THUS HAVE I HEARD.579 Once the Lord was staying in Magadha, to the east of Rājagaha, by a Brahmin village called Ambasaṇḍā, to the north of the village on Mount Vediya, in the Indasāla Cave.580 And at that time SAKKA, LORD OF THE GODS,581 felt a strong desire to see the Lord. And Sakka thought: ‘Where is the Blessed Lord, the fully-enlightened Buddha, now staying?’ Then, perceiving where the Lord was, Sakka said to the THIRTY-THREE GODS: ‘Gentlemen, the Blessed Lord is staying in Magadha...in the Indasāla Cave. How would it be if we were to go and visit the Lord?’ ‘Very good, Lord, and may good fortune go with you’, replied the THIRTY-THREE GODS.
http://www.palicanon.org/en/sutta-pitaka/transcribed-suttas/majjhima-nikaya/136-mn-82-rahapla-sutta-on-rahapla.html

Buddha being praised because he benefit to the humans and the GODS :

‘They will revere that Gotama,
who is of benefit to GODS and men,
who has understanding and good conduct,
who is great and fully mature.
https://suttacentral.net/en/dn32


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.20.0.than.html

>>1691990
>most of the leading "intellectuals" are faith affiliated individuals

Top kek
Most philosophers and leading scientists are atheists

>>1692005
>top kek
no sir, wrong wrong wrong. most leading scientists are definitely not atheists. as most scientists realize that matter doesn't create itself.
therefore it must have been created by a being. a supreme being. aka a deity. God. end of story.

>>1691678
Not everyone who believes in deities believes they created the universe.

>>1691946
Buddhism isnt really atheistic as it is non-theistic. I myself am a theistic buddhists. But thats not a requirement of my religion, its just something i have decided out side of buddhism. you can be an atheist buddhist, or a theist buddhist, however there is no place to worship a being in buddhism, so most are non-theistic or atheistic.

>>1692174
Buddhists venerate and make offerings to buddhas and bodhisattvas, that's worship in all but name.

>>1691936
I personally am buddhist.
Buddhism provides salvation through enlightment, which i probably wont reach, but thats ok, because i will be reborn and maybe that thing i become will become enlightened.
if i dont being enlightened, i go to a new body and live life over again, and life, at least the way we live it, is mostly suffering, from anger, saddness, etc.
And if i am wrong, i think buddhism is too a good guide to live ones life by.

>>1691856
I am buddhism [spoiler] zen [/spoiler] and this is pretty much my views.
you can be a christian and a buddhist at the same time. Buddha and Jesus had very similar teachings.

Whatever. God never listen to me! He has attitude may be!:O

>>1692199
I personally dont do that. I recognize that happens in inda and sri lanka. But in zen buddhism (which i didnt specify) such things are irrelevant.
I agree that what they are doing is pretty much worshipping the buddha, i dont know why they do it as it seems to step on what the buddha make pretty clear and that is that we arent to have attachments. I agree that it happens but i dont know why they do it and i personally again dont do it.

>>1691962
That's the whole point though. "spiritual" is the word you are looking for.

>because they know that everything didn't just spontaneously create itself.
How did god come into creation?
>inb4 you answer the exact same thing

File: image.jpg (101KB, 437x600px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 437x600px

>>1691678

> everything didn't just spontaneously create itself.

"Of course not."

> therefore a god created it

"Uh...?"

>>1692213
Most of the laity do it out of respect for the achievements of bodhisattvas or because they want some assistance. And in Vajrayana at least, as you follow the path you come to see that a) deities are empty of inherent existence and b) the distinction between you and the deity is illusory.

>>1692214
yes, thankyou anon, spiritual is a good replacement.
if you want me to answer the same question with a different answer the best I can do is give you is a slightly different answer that arrives at the same conclusion.

God existed. That is how he came into creation.
God is creation itself. God came before creation
or worded this way if you like:
>inb4 creation

>>1692255
The most popular position within Atheism is literally that everything created itself

File: image.jpg (21KB, 200x290px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 200x290px

>>1692299

Literally caricature.

What created my creator?

>>1691936
No, there is literally an infinite amount of possible gods based on what we know, and it wouldn't be honest anyway. Maybe God doesn't like liars.

>>1692255
those eyes anon. mystifying.
and yes. God is creation itself. get the picture of a human out of your head.
The epitome, the definition, the spelling, the pure being of creation itself.
the individual thoughts that are created from the firing of neurons in your brain, built by cells that were formed using adenosine triphosphate, culminated from the driving force of hydrogen bonds, a conglomeration of quarks. God is every bit of that picture. he is that picture. he is the word picture. God is everything. God is creation.

Folks, I will write a new Bible for all y'all. It will be better than Christianity, that much I can guarantee.

File: Lighting God.jpg (214KB, 345x477px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 345x477px

> Everything totally must be created, guys. Believe me!
> Except God, because it isn't like everything must be created! XD
Yeah, such not retarded way of thinking here. At least, we know that some thinks, like radioactive decay just happens, and that all. Meanwhile you base your logic on principle so shit that the God himself shit on it.

>>1692320
I'm the God of God.

If Heaven exists, what imperative do I have of living, when I could blow my brains out and enjoy eternal paradise immediately? Any religious folks care to try? You can come down and let me know if you have a few seconds to spare out of your new infinite life.

>>1692315
but no God has influenced humanity more so than that of the Abrahamic faiths. so yes. you are right, God doesn't like liars. but he dislikes unbelievers more.
And yes, you can say that impacted may be blighted by more bad than good, or more good than bad. but the fact is, God is not bound by human morals.

>>1692282
> God existed. That is how he came into creation.
Well, you can say that Universe existed and stop to waste time for everyone at this point.

>>1691697
Are you seriously foolish enough to believe that a complex being that is God does not have a creator? I believe that there are many Gods each with their own creators, and those creators also have their own creators.

>>1691678
>God
Fuck off. I'll give props to Yahweh for throwing a big temper tantrum, but to insinuate that that worthless Judaic storm god is the only one in existence betrays a lack of knowledge.

>>1692341
Primitive spirits and such existed thousands years before and longer than any monotheistic faith. How can you claim that they influenced humanity more?

>>1691678
Why are you so backwards and don't believe in Allah? Islam is set to be the words most dominant religion so why not follow them?

>>1692344
I agree with him. Truly absurd to believe that God could just pop up from nowhere. There was meta-creation and God's God was cause of it.

File: w0MTsniIGzJnCpcUdZWS0ZgbijQ0BiRNXe3RTdPp3Kk.jpg (92KB, 571x768px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 571x768px

>>1691678
Why are Christians such fedoras who have to bother other people about their beliefs?

Nobody says your fedora-theological "nothing" is what existed before the big bang, there were still quantum events and other things happening.

>>1692332
>radioactive decay just happens
False, go back physics 101 bud. A hydrogen proton doesn't undergo any sort of radioactive decay.
And its not principle, nor morals, nor ethics.
>Faith
nothing just happens fool. thanks for epitomizing backwards thinking towards spontaneous generation

>>1692332
>radioactive decay just happens
False, go back physics 101 bud. A hydrogen proton doesn't undergo any sort of radioactive decay.
And its not principle, nor morals, nor ethics.
>Faith
nothing just happens fool.

>>1692339
Well, why don't you do it? Because God didn't hardwire us to so easily commit suicide.

>>1692368

Why? Is your god not powerful enough to create a universe where things "just happen"?

>>1692344
could God not have created himself from a previous self existence in his own image?

>>1692367
> False, go back physics 101 bud.
Hardware random-number generators are literally based on true randomness of radioactive decay, anon. Practical applications are more important, that your "can't happen, because I told you".

>>1692343
by that i mean he is existence himself. he is the whole complex that involves existence creation and nothingness

>>1692367
> nothing just happens fool.
Nice conspiracy theory here.

File: System (32).png (25KB, 160x192px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 160x192px

>>1692368
> Nothing just happens!
> ... but, God just exist.

>>1692387
> he is existence himself
Pantheism doesn't require any creation. Learn your basics, anon.

>>1692351
lol. polytheism is a joke. why would God represent himself through multiple individual deities, rather than one entity himself. (trinity is one entity in itself)

>nothing begins to exist without a cause

but god didn't exist until zoroaster invented him millenia ago, what created the universe?

File: 1429207847882.jpg (147KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 768x1024px

>>1692398

>>1692352
do you them now? have you seen them in the recent 2000 years? or even past 5000 years with any significant influence over a vast majority of the world.

>>1692398
Why would many Gods represent itself as singular being? Seems even more retarded to be honest. It is more logical to believe in many Gods than claim a mathematical non-sense about how three equals one.

>>1692356
kek. same God. same messiah. Islam doesn't believe trinity. and no, not set to be most dominant religion.

>>1692357
>meta-creation
hello philosophy PhD anon. see you are still trying to find a purpose for your "formal training"

>>1692406
> only last 2000 years matter
Why not last 200 years, while we are at it. Surely at this point, science was more influential than all religions together for humanity.

File: 1429237988531.gif (2MB, 383x576px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 383x576px

>>1692415

>>1692375
Because there is no Heaven, this is our only shot at existence. If you were so sure Heaven aka eternal paradise existed, you would kill yourself, because you could do whatever you want in Heaven. Why do you think suicide bombers kill themselves and others for 99 virgins? But you see, there is doubt in your mind, that is why you haven't done it yet, you look at those suicide bomber and think, "what the hell made them do that?", and yet their dream no different than yours.

>>1692362
im prodding. because i can. why did you respond?
and what created those quantum events anon? don't tell me that hadrons and leptons created themselves from another "big bang"-esk theory, which in turn was created by a domino effect of instances. There had to be a start.

>>1692415
> he doesn't believe in meta-creation
Why this board is flooded with close minded atheists like you?

>>1692378
he did. when he created it. it just happened. after he created it.
>and he saw that it was good

>>1692415
(1) ◊□p → p
(2) ◊□p
∴ p

>>1692426
> There had to be a start.
They just happen, that is your start. Do you really need some elaborate conspiracy theory to personally blame someone here or what?

>>1692434

Ah-theism is the thesis that one ought to lack belief in god.

>>1692426
Yes, that's exactly what happened. Extremely improbably but on an infinite timescale, very unprobable things can become almost necessary.

>>1692386
>hardware number generators
Again, wrong anon. Hardware number generators use an amplifier to distinguish the data it will get. therefore altering the data it pops out. if using a thermal noise signal, you can easily alter the data produced again.
>nice google search though

>>1692389
>conspiracy theory
>can't come up with a true example of spontaneity

>>1692397
ha, pantheism. nice try bud. God encompasses everything. not the other way around.

>>1692401
>millenia
>persia not that old
done

>>1692416
>science explains how not why

>>1692420
read the book before you make your assertions as to why you wouldn't seek that path to heaven.
in my faith, not speaking for others, you want to show your creator why you deserve to be included. first, accepting. second, obeying.

>>1692460
> God spontaneously *just* exist
> It isn't example of spontaneity!

>>1692475
It is just happens that know how is more influential than know why. Even primitive tribes could explain anything with their naive mythologies.

>>1692434
those theories are just as unprovable as the existence of a God. you beleive in it because it makes sense.

>>1692465
There is no other way around as there is nothing except everything.

>>1692483
It doesn't make sense that one being in control of the everything. Especially when monotheism tries to claim that there is free will for us to sin. Such a freedom means that God doesn't have total control and can't be sole reason for everything.

>>1692478
So much for God giving us free will

98% of the population is backwards.

>>1692521
*tips fedora*

>>1691715
>The idea of a religious canon is almost entirely exclusive to the abrahamic faiths
And the abrahamcucks has this strange fetish to think that all other religions must be judged according to the abrahamitic standards of cuckage.

>>1691678
Are you implying 98% of the population is correct? They can't even agree on what God encompasses, just because they all "believe" in something doesn't mean it is coherent.

>>1692671
appeal to democracy

gtfo

we're all equal

sure sounds like communism

"democratic capitalism" lul

>>1691678
SO JUXTAPOSITIONATIVE

>>1692101
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html

>>1691678
Nice strawman religious moron but do EXPLAIN how your deity created the universe.

>>1693205
read the bible

>>1693206
No you made the claim the deity made the universe so explain how they did it.

>>1691678
Because I'm not so simple minded to think the choice is between super duper infinite sky man who comes and fucks about in some tiny shithole country on some speck of dust in the milky way, and nothing at all.

You were made when a sperm combined with an egg, creating you non consciously. This is a fact.

I only believe in our god and saviour Kek. Before that I was lost to agnosticism.

I wish i was religious/had beliefs, I think I would be happier.

But I can't really force myself to believe in something that I don't.

I wasn't raised religious or in a culture where much emphasis is placed on religion. Since then I haven't had any revelation that would force me to believe. Thinking about the beginning of the universe is useless as it has no bearing on my life.

>ITT
>Problems only ameifats have
>Rest of civilization fortunately has given up on religion some time ago

>>1693270
*tips fedora*
less than 10% of people in the world are fedoras

File: images.washingtonpost.com.jpg (81KB, 1484x1164px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1484x1164px

>>1693274
The US, and some shitskinz believe in skydaddy, the rest of the civilized world not so much. And it is getting less every year. Lifes good.

>>1693286
euphoric
based muslims should correct that

File: Girls.jpg (77KB, 600x536px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 600x536px

>>1693286
>US is Mexico tier
>Canada is only developed country on American continent

>>1693292
>based muslims should correct that
confirmed for amerifat, otherwise you'd know that even the majority of mudslimes in Europe go irreligious pretty fast.

>>1691678
>create itself
When you talk about making something, you're really talking about the transformation of one thing to another. Plants "create" sugars from carbon dioxide and water. Humans "create" tools out of metal ore we refine, wood we cut and sand, plastics we make out of petroleum products. The history of the universe is not one of something from nothing, but of CHANGE. the laws of physics determine how all of that change happens, and don't require design or intelligence to do this.

Humans have the concept of creation because we have different words for different constructs, and when we use one to make another, it has a "beginning". But if all of those beginnings are really false, and what really happens is that we simply decide that this thing we've created is "new" because it seems that way, why think the universe had a beginning anyway? There are ideas in the scientific community that the universe we know had a "beginning" event in the big bang, but that a "pre big bang" universe existed, in the form of the condensed matter. Before that, if there is a "before", it's difficult to say. But nothing "created" itself, it moved, it expanded, it changed. And it's been doing this from a time long before the intentional creation of anything.

>>1693299
read the holy bible

save yourself anon.

>>1693286
>tfw China is 0-25% religious
Couldn't that partly be chalked up to people not considering confucianism, buddhism or daoism to be religions, but traditions.

File: miracle.jpg (50KB, 435x357px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 435x357px

>>1691678
>All but 2% of the population

Ah yes, we rare few, we aristocrats.

Just because a group takes the minority position does not make it wrong. Many times throughout history has the unpopular view ended up being vindicated.

>spontaneously create

>create

Here is where you fly into silly territory. You assume the universe is a made object, an artifact rather than an organic physical occurrence.

What you are doing is substituting your ignorance for God.

File: correlation.png (199KB, 1377x1044px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1377x1044px

>>1691678

Because it doesn't matter.

The most compelling arguments for God are the ones which strip away every single quality that makes God consequential to human society or the goings-on of the universe in general.

>>1691678
Because I'm part of the minority of educated and relatively wealthy people with the time and freedom to actually consider the nature of the world at my own leisure.

I'd be up for it if the people who practiced this shit would just use their sacred books more like a philosophy book to try and improve their lifestyle rather than treat it like the be all end all to their life because if they piss off some dude in the sky they might get punished and sent to some very hot place where they will get whipped on the ass for the rest of eternity.

>>1691945
Second Law of Thermodynamics also state total entropy always increases. So has God, who has existed forever, decayed away?

>>1694979
>Correlation = Causation
Oh the irony.

>>1695024
God, being a voo doo manifestation, is not governed by the natural laws of the material world.

>I mean c'mon, what do you mean you christians only believe in one god? are you saying the other 99.9% of the population are all wrong?

>>1695024
God is an eternal spirit being.

Do you really think God is subject to the laws God makes?

>>1691678
It has no real impact on my life. I also am literally incapable of making myself believe in God. I do find religions and myths interesting though.

>>1695024
If you're a materialist, yes. If you're a non-materialist (Thomist, Aristotelian, Platonist, or any other that believes in immaterial reality), no.

>>1691678
>populism meme

That just shows that deities are attractive to human psychology. It has nothing to do with their inherent truth.

>>1695024
Remember, religious people don't believe in science.

File: 1473832608681.jpg (154KB, 1252x1252px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1252x1252px

Been looking into the abrahamic religions as of late, started with the bible. Just about finished, really enjoy it and I like a lot of the Christian tenants.

But I just came across the "christian submission" bit in the book of Peter and I'm having issues accepting what it says.

I simply can't accept that Christians should bow to authorities that are opressive towards them or their families simply because authority is put into place by god.

From my understanding, satan has current rule of the Earth and its kingdoms, not god.

So when the satanic cults behind western powers put in their puppets to dismantle christian nations why would this not be a call for Christians to call out this demonic rule?

>>1696020
Well the Abrahamics are progressive versions of feudalism codified. If you don't obey your Lord off with your pleb head then. The good books are about obedience to authority. Some dude named Milgram looked into this but nothing much was made of his experiments other than much wonder and awe.

>>1691678
Back when the first writing systems were invented most people were illiterate.
Does that mean literacy was wrong?

>The results of historical conditions imply that said results themselves are good/right
How could anyone believe this?

>>1691678
Because if we don't know something, it's automatically unseen magical agency. Brilliant primitive thinking, OP.