Religion Provides Emotional Boost to World's Poor

(Gallup poll)

In low-income areas, religiosity linked to more enjoyment, less worry

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116449/Religion-Provides-Emotional-Boost-World-Poor.aspx

Seems like a great time to offer the oft-misquoted "Opium of the People" text from Karl Marx, which was in his manuscript/book Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. Read it carefully, maybe twice. It hardly comes off the way we're all supposed to think of it:

"Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man—state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d'honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion. Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo." [bold text mine, of course]

:glugglug:
 

maildude

Postal Paranoiac
Religion is like anything else: by itself it's harmless. In the wrong hands it can be a problem.
 

Philbert

Banned
And used by the World's Rich as a tool to destroy the lives of the poor....:hatsoff::wave2:

Like the poor don't do anything to contribute to the situation?
Like burning down their neighborhoods in the LA riots...that was real smart.

I think crap statements like that are worse than any religious position.
 
Can we please return to the subject I posted?
 
(Gallup poll)

In low-income areas, religiosity linked to more enjoyment, less worry

http://www.gallup.com/poll/116449/Religion-Provides-Emotional-Boost-World-Poor.aspx

Seems like a great time to offer the oft-misquoted "Opium of the People" text from Karl Marx, which was in his manuscript/book Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. Read it carefully, maybe twice. It hardly comes off the way we're all supposed to think of it:

"Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man—state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d'honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion. Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo." [bold text mine, of course]

:glugglug:

that is good bullshit :laugh::eyeso::jester:
 
that is good bullshit :laugh::eyeso::jester:

Can you elaborate? Which part do you find to be bullshit? The Gallup research or Marx's thoughts? Both?
 

Philbert

Banned
Indeed...key word "bullshit".
Do you really need clarification?:rofl:
 
Indeed...key word "bullshit".
Do you really need clarification?:rofl:

Maybe we should agree to not post on threads which the other person starts? Or even respond to each other's posts at all?

I find that you primarily serve to pollute the threads I start. It's as though you're stalking me here. Trolling. You just snipe and don't say anything substantive. Lots of ad hominem, nothing constructive or enlightening. I can think of several people here at the FO forum that I regularly disagree with but who still have interesting and constructive things to say, and they contribute to an edifying discussion. You are not among them.

So, is it a deal?

I'll be happy to steer well clear of any and all threads you start, and to never respond to any of your individual posts, as well...
 
The Gallop poll is true, people that have religion in their lives DO tend to be happier. I think its because of that faith that they don't tend to sweat the small stuff (maybe?). I'm not religious so if I have spoken out of turn, I apologize.

However, Karl Marx attitude toward religion does have a spark of malice. As if because he doesn't have a total grasp on it, he hates it. My feelings on it.

Granted, as Maildude said....
Religion is like anything else: by itself it's harmless. In the wrong hands it can be a problem.
Agnosticism and Athieism are just as dangerous in the wrong hands, such as Mr. Marx.

The real problem is that whatever you believe or your lack of belief, is when you forcibly push those ideals on those that do not want them, as they already have a belief, or do not care. The amount of arguements and wars over religion, division of faiths, and their desire to dominate over all is incredibly.... selfish.
 

ChefChiTown

The secret ingredient? MY BALLS
Isn't this common sense?

Religion offers you something to look forward to when you die. In other words, it makes your day and all of the hardships, bullshit and overall pain you go through each and every day seem "worth it". So, in low-income, "poor" neighborhoods, it would only make sense that religion "helps" them a bit.
 
Agnosticism and Athieism are just as dangerous in the wrong hands, such as Mr. Marx.

The controversies that Marx has spurred in great social and historical debates have largely arisen from what he had to say about economics and labor - not whether or not there is a God. There is nothing in what he said regarding those controversial issues that could not be said (or has not been said in many cases) by a person of deep faith. He didn't think workers of the world should unite in order to prove there was no God (which it wouldn't prove, in any case).

Isn't this common sense?

Religion offers you something to look forward to when you die. In other words, it makes your day and all of the hardships, bullshit and overall pain you go through each and every day seem "worth it". So, in low-income, "poor" neighborhoods, it would only make sense that religion "helps" them a bit.

I'm not sure why you put the words poor and helps in quotation marks - could you explain? I suspect there's a meaning there - that you're not simply quoting someone else - but I want to be sure...
 

ChefChiTown

The secret ingredient? MY BALLS
I'm not sure why you put the words poor and helps in quotation marks - could you explain? I suspect there's a meaning there - that you're not simply quoting someone else - but I want to be sure...

I wasn't quoting anybody. Sometimes I put quotes around words like that because I picture myself using finger quotes when I'm "saying" them. See, like that.

:rolleyes:
 

Violator79

Take a Hit, Spunker!
I guess the people need something to believe in, but when they find out that all religion gives is false security and fake promises, they'll look somewhere else.
 
I wasn't quoting anybody. Sometimes I put quotes around words like that because I picture myself using finger quotes when I'm "saying" them. See, like that.

:rolleyes:

Yes, ok, I understand that. You weren't quoting anyone, so why would you (did you) use finger quotes? Typically, it's used to indicate that the speaker/writer is being sarcastic or doesn't agree with the term being used as others have used it.

[I'm also aware that the whole finger quotes thing is so popular now and so often misused that it's become quasi-meaningless - so that's why I'm asking for your clarification.]
 

ChefChiTown

The secret ingredient? MY BALLS
Yes, ok, I understand that. You weren't quoting anyone, so why would you (did you) use finger quotes? Typically, it's used to indicate that the speaker/writer is being sarcastic or doesn't agree with the term being used as others have used it.

Well, because not all people who live in low-income areas are necessarily poor. Also, I don't really see how believing in God and the afterlife makes anything you go through "worth it", which is why I used the quotations.

It's just how I type, I guess.
 
The controversies that Marx has spurred in great social and historical debates have largely arisen from what he had to say about economics and labor - not whether or not there is a God. There is nothing in what he said regarding those controversial issues that could not be said (or has not been said in many cases) by a person of deep faith. He didn't think workers of the world should unite in order to prove there was no God (which it wouldn't prove, in any case)


After Karl Marx graduated from the University of Bonn, he joined a group of "like-minded philosophers" that had deep "Hegelian" beliefs. Although he was a former Christian devotee, he later, with the Hegelian Believers, would call the Christian Gospels, "Human fantasies arising from emotional needs." Marx would later continue on this path and become an outright Atheist, others would say a Satanist.

His personal beliefs would be the foundation for his founding of Marxism.
 
Well, because not all people who live in low-income areas are necessarily poor. Also, I don't really see how believing in God and the afterlife makes anything you go through "worth it", which is why I used the quotations.

It's just how I type, I guess.

Well, it probably depends on which specific "'poor' neighborhoods" we're talking about. I would bet (a few dollars -haha) that we could find plenty of geographically distinct (you could trace an outline around them on the map) areas where everyone falls below poverty-level income. Same goes with wealthy or "upscale" neighborhoods.

As for your 2nd point, well, if you "knew" (inasmuch as that's actually possible for anyone to know) that you would actually be rewarded with a perfect, infinite life in a Heaven paradise for enduring all of your earthly shit, well, that would make things more "worth it" wouldn't it??....
 

ChefChiTown

The secret ingredient? MY BALLS
As for your 2nd point, well, if you "knew" (inasmuch as that's actually possible for anyone to know) that you would actually be rewarded with a perfect, infinite life in a Heaven paradise for enduring all of your earthly shit, well, that would make things more "worth it" wouldn't it??....

Yeah, if I knew for a fact that the afterlife was real, things would seem worth it. But, religion is all based on beliefs, stories and traditions, not factual information, which is a terrible way to live your life, in my opinion. To each their own, but it's not for me.
 
Top