How can intelligent people be religious?

Lots of the time you'll see one of two things, and sometimes both; Compartmentalization, and desperation.
Compartmentalization usually comes from having been raised in one's chosen religion, and therefore treat it uncritically. Other times, the idea of death is just too scary for some people.

File: lovechav.jpg (15KB, 250x351px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 250x351px

"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents."

>>2735755
i know a bunch of real smart people that are muslims, but they told me they dont believe in it as the actual truth but rather stick to it out of habit and because of family. another one said he "didnt want to break character", maybe he was just afraid of people changing their views on him.

it's more like participating in a reason to join up with the old family rather than playing a role as a rigid dogma

How can intelligent people only see the materialistic world? How can intelligent people not realize there is more to the universe than what his senses (vision, hearing, taste, feel, smell) tell him?

Not so intelligent now, are you Fedora tipper?

>>2735865
there is a difference between keeping an open mind and taking one's own wishful thinking as a fact

I think the problem with athiest understanding of how the religious perceive their belief is that its fundamental and factual when really it is moral and traditional. The bible is a collection of fables and encapsulate morals and bind society. The fables describe how individuals should act in the interest of themselves and society.

>>2735876
Basing reality on the basis of the material world is wishful thinking indeed.

>>2735920
If that's the case, does it matter if a person gets the SAME moral standards from a different source?

Most academics I've met are religious in different ways that correspond to their field

>>2735937
not him but how? the "material world" is the world we can perceive. why does it make more sense to base an understanding of reality on what we cannot perceive?

>>2735941
What source?

>>2735952
The same way a goldfish only perceives his fishbowl as his entire existence.

Metaphysics.

>>2735991
nice poem. is that what you base your worldview on? jokes? riddles? you do realize that's not an argument, right?

for one example, a goldfish can see someone bringing food to their bowl and will respond accordingly. your analogy is weak in the first place.

for another example, we can perceive that there is a world outside of the bowl of a goldfish, but we cannot perceive that there is a world outside of the world that we can perceive. there is a basis for a world extending beyond the bowl, but no basis for a world extending beyond our perception. this is what makes your poem "poetry", it has no actual meaning.

for a further argument, one could argue that the fishbowl is the fishes entire existence, and if he has no perception outside of it, there is no reason for it to conclude that anything exists beyond it. the goldfish is devoid of our outside perspective, it would be illogical for it to assume there exists a thing beyond it's perception, and it would also be irrelevant to it's existence, when it's existence is the fishbowl. this is a poetic analogy to stand against your poetic analogy. both are equally logically valid(not at all) bases in an argument.

I would be embarrassed if I held worldview positions based off of what are literally jokes.

>>2735991
you mean the bit of reality outside our perception is little more than an extension of our material world into another material world with things unknown to us? what is the human's fishbowl in that case, maybe the currently unovercomable distance between us and the rest of the universe?

that's what your analogy says aside from "the mind of a physical being is limited in its ability to understand"

ITT: Retards baiting fedoras
Stop it.

>>2735755
>why would an intelligent person beleive there is something greater
Because it all seems just too perfect

>>2735957
not religion

I'm asking you if you think that's possible

>>2736075
cringe

>>2736249
Not an argument, sweetie.
*sips tea*

You can remove the Gospel from the Old testament, in which Christ's message contains no glaring errors.

File: 1451997508352.jpg (42KB, 500x348px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x348px

>>2736268
Isn't the Gospel in the New Testament?

>>2736233
There's a difference between assuming there might be 'something greater' to existence, and a specific belief in God or concepts like a soul, enlightenment or some spiritual meaning to life. Though at least with those I can understand why somebody would believe in those. What I can never understand is belief in prophets and holy books. That's just retarded.

>>2735755
I have a really good friend, intelligent programmer, logical, raised without religion, he's the most legit and complete Christian I've ever known. He's not a Jesus freak, he lives it as written and truly believes all of it as does his wife.

Here's why: when he was a college kid he questioned what gave his parents authority over him, e.g where they get their authority. Any reasonable person would see that the community as a whole grants authority, but he said who gives them authority?

In this search for an ultimate authority he discovered Christianity, which conveniently has a book written by the ultimate authority (which we know because the book says so) and thus his question had a nice clean answer to who is the ultimate authority.

The ironic thing is while we are good friends he's quiet bemused by me because in the most moral boy scout person he's ever meet or probably ever will and he can't figure out why, since I don't have the guiding principles of a higher power dictating my behavior.

>>2735957
community

>>2736277
I mean take the Gospel out of the bible, and keep it as a separate document.

>>2735755
Everyone has different reasons, OP. Most people also consider themselves "intelligent", despite this obviously skewing the relative meaning of the term. I think a lot of atheists selectively assume their beliefs are based on evidence and logic, but most of them are willing to believe in concepts like alien life that has no empirical evidence to support it, or concepts like causality that lead to infinite regress, or logical positivism which is self-contradictory. Actual "logic" is extremely rare. Besides that - everyone bases their beliefs partially on emotion (pathos) and sources/norms (ethos) as well as reason. If you don't believe me, consider how many atheists say a depressing experience or pessimistic view of the world influenced their doubt in God.

I myself am a Buddhist because it works for me and I feel gotama had profound insights into reality. I am open to being wrong. Most Christians and Muslims presumably doubt their faith at points, just like atheists sometimes worry about Hell. You're making people out to be a lot more divided and dissimilar that we really are, IMO, and falling for the old trap of thinking those that agree with you are generally smart, and those that disagree are generally stupid. People (and the world) are more complex than that. I doubt you really have much knowledge of religion outside abrahamic faiths, and even then... have you actually read the many works of renown Christian or Islamic scholars and philosophers before you made this judgment? All claims to knowledge can be understood as conceit, and there will be people 1000 years from now laughing at modern science just like we today laugh at phlogiston theory or premodern accounts of fantastic creatures. I would suggest you genuinely investigate if you wish to understand opposing mindsets, rather than engaging in ridicule.

>>2735755
Because at a certain point you realise that religion is really about 95% ethics and has more in common with philosophy than it does science. Thats why many of the greatest scientists were Christian, because they understood that it didn't matter what the old testament said, what mattered is that its the foundation of western society and promoted good values.

File: Kramskoi_Christ_dans_le_désert.jpg (226KB, 1134x1001px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 1134x1001px

>>2735755
If religious people are dumb why there is no religious animals? God is a complicated abstract concept only truly developed humans can understand. Primitive tribes doesn't have concept of God or religion. I've read memoirs of missionaries and all of them was saying that tribesmen didn't even have such words for God, faith etc. making it hard to introduce them to the teaching of the Christ. Animals and primitive humans are materialistic, they eat, sleep, breed they don't know what is faith, retribution, repentance. This concepts are all abstract and very hard for a weak minds. Most people you called religious are only believe because they told to. People with a true faith are very intelligent.

>>2735755
If you have to ask this, you're not intelligent. Also probably underage b&

>>2736278
this. I guess like this guy said >>2736287, religion gives you a clean answer to these question all of us have. You feel that there is a god somewhere? well here he is. I too was raised religious but lost my faith. Sometimes I listen to church songs on youtube and wish I could go back in honesty.

>>2736814
they probably have gods and worship nature or something. I think that if they bury or burn their dead (which all humans do since we became homo sapiens) then they have some belief in supernatural so is really far fetched to compare them to animals

>>2735755
There is nothing good about being smart.

>>2736287
>written by the ulimate authority

But it wasn't.

It was written by humans, adjusted over time, edited and translated.

>>2735852
"Cultural" [Insert religion here] make me sick.

>>2736075

Retarded

>>2735937
One can be skeptic even in his own spirituality. Why, of all the possible spiritual outlooks I can internalize, I should chose religion? And why Christianity in particular?

Spirituality does not necessary imply religiousness, nor does it imply already existing religions.

Personally I don't buy unto it, but a primary facet of Christianity as I was taught growing up was unquestioning faith in God. The idea is that man cannot know the nature of God, so it's presupposed that any evidence that he doesn't exist is mistaken, and that we cannot judge his action on human expectations because we cannot possibly know all he knows and see the long game.

It's reasonable enough if God exists but it requires that assumption so it's kinda shit unless you already believe.

Most people aren't intelligent. Yes, they might have education and appear smart, but they're simply average or somewhere in the intelligence spectrum above the bottom stupids.

>>2735920

That sounds more like an Aetheistic appreciation for the bible and less like what they teach in church.

Some people need to feel a part of a group and a part of something greater than them. Being religious and having a leader (Jesus or God or the priests etc.), being part of a community, having clear symbols and ceremonies and all that.

The religious tribe gives them all this shit. It's like a cult, only it's not considered crazy by the general population and your parents and coworkers.

>>2737440
Yeah okay but what about the people who are?

>>2737440
The term you're looking for is ''self-aware'', deep religiousness is perfectly compatible with high intelligence.
Atheists on the internet should be a hint of it.

>>2737485
>deep religiousness is perfectly compatible with high intelligence
Is it? Is astrology compatible with high intelligence? Or playing the lottery?

>>2737526
Was Euler essentially stupid? Was Bach a retard? Was Aquinas a drooling downie?
These are all quintessential geniuses who actually, deeply believed in the Scripture: I honestly can't doubt their intelligence, nor I have any reason to doubt their Faith.

It makes sense to group religion with every other irrational belief in a macro group, but this is not how humans think. Of all the irrational ideas you can think of religion is one of the most appealing, the one who took most victims all thorough history, independently of culture, intelligence and vocation. Some people simply fall into it, and can't distinguish its irrationality from the irrationality of any of the other irrational beliefs you've mentioned.

This does not imply in any way that they're stupid, it just shows us that certain extremely intelligent people are willing to hold irrational beliefs.

>>2737543
>Was Bach a retard?
He made shit music

>>2737560
Regardless of your taste you can't really say that it was ''stupid'' music: it is in fact one of the most insightful and complex peaks of musical academicism there is.
My point still stands.

>>2737560

Pleb detected

>>2735755
Expect everyone you meet to be a conman. You will avoid a lot of hurt that way

File: 1473371636117.jpg (6KB, 240x180px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 240x180px

>>2737560
Careful now.

>>2737560
Atheist and triggered.