gigi

To legion
Religion mainly has been used to control, but don't forget that for example in ancient Egypt the "clergymen"(I don't know the english word for them) where also the astronomers, the doctors, the mathimaticians, etc..So in some cases (extremely few) religion has been used to explain the various phenomena around us.
In the middle ages, in most cases only the elite knew how to read and write. When you don't have food on your table every day, reading and writing is the last thing you want to know.
A question, when a doctor visits you don't you give money to him/her? The words of the shamans meant nothing, but they knew how to treat people in case of some illnesses,not of course because of anything magic but because of experience (this plant does good in that illness and so on). Some of those "magic" plants are used also in modern medicine. Just out of recognition of his/her work shouldn't be given something ?(in many of the tribes that had a shaman they didn't had money, food and clothes where the means of paying someone)
Places of worship nowadays are based on money and how they can get more. If you mean it in that sense, then yes they are trying to have somekind of power (eternal punishment, eternal life, paradise) on the minds of people, but not in order to do not have any rebellions but only to do not lose the money.

bullshark

God, as viewed as the intelligence behind the creation of the universe, is a possibility that is impossible to prove; so everybody's own belief in this matter could be right.

Organized religion on the other hand, personified by such book as the bible, the koran and other meaningless babble, are an invention of men with the single purpose of controlling other men, sometime for better but often for the worst.

My only hope is that we, the human race, will eventually evolve and outgrow the need for this dangerous nonsense that is religion.

Jean Fred

Guess Nietzsche won't help much.
Suggest you read Karl Popper("The open universe" and "Of clouds and clocks") to deeper research the concept of "truth".
Also thrilling especially for a math nut is Heisenberg ("The uncertainty relations").Chevaliertuc should have a go.
Honesty thru modesty???

gigi

Thanks Jean Fred and I will read them

Chevaliertuc

Hi all
I'm now at school in Lille, so i have not enough time to answer to you, Gigi, but i'll make it on Saturday.
But, Jean Fred, i would be glad to understand what you mean with
"Chevaliertuc should have a go.
Honesty thru modesty???"
Actually, i can't have a go in this book, but if you want to give me, who NEVER said i would be able to understand or to explain, and here, i believe that i've not repeated enough that for me the ideas of knowledge, and also of modesty or pretention, have no sense. so if you want to tell me there is a "disproof" in this book, you may ewplain it on this chat... (Honesty??)
And i think Nietzsche does help!! Just read it!
The question of God is very important in his books of course. But also the question of the "existence"... but you can read any book and see in it what you want. anyway. I'll speak something about it (what's means: i'm going to explain my point of view, i'm not going to teach who's Nietzsche!)
So, see you soon...
Olivier.

Jean Fred

Hi, Chevaliertuc !
Said should have a go, which means you might benefit from reading these books. Didn't say should have ego for you obviously don't need the advice.
Since you are such a Nietszche specialist, you certainly know that after "The Birth Of Tragedy", good old Frederik got mixed up and that his corpus self review (Ecce Homo, How One Becomes what One Is) starts with sections entitled "Why I am so wise", "Why Iam so clever" and "Why I write such good books"!!! And that was about one month before he lost his mind and got confined in a nuthouse.
As for modesty related honesty, it has to do with communicating with people instead of lecturing them, simplifying instead of complexifying, and if advising books to read, doing it in such a way it sounds friendly and not condescending.

Chevaliertuc

Hi
_If you see pretention, "evil" in my way to explain and in my way to complexify, i suggest you could "have a go" in "Alice in Wonderland", which may be a little complex, but actually, less complex than Nietzsche.
Why must all be easy, not complex??? You must think Platoon is the worst philosoph there was on earth...
_I can't speak english, i just build sentences: i don't know if my sentences sound "condescending" or just "modest", and i simply can't speak an other way. but if you speak french...
_ AND I'm not lecturing anyone!!
If you want to communicate (and stop insulting), you can also make philosophy ==> i have never seen in your posts something about this question "Does God exist?"...right? And i've never avoided anyone to "communicate" with me. I NEVER (can I say it more loudly???) told my opinion was the "truth". NEVER!! How do you can think that someone who wnat to demonstrate that truth doesn't exist thinks he is the truth??? I can't understand (but you already observed i was crazy).
ACTUALLY, I've just tried to explain my mind, and i have to use strong words and strong sentences, because i have to fight against the current way of thinking. Here is needed something strong. As for Nietsche when he wrote his books: he had to fight against christianism (you may think i believe i'm Nietzsche, and i don't care). I'm waiting that someone answer to my arguments, and i asked if anyone could make a demonstration, a disproof ===> that is communication. But you didn't make it. Maybe you thing it's not worth it, it's too stupid, "i'm not discussing with someone who don't ever think as me". I'm still waiting. Can you make anything other than insulting? Have you arguments? (precision: you are in a forum called "philosophy")
And I think you should read Nietzsche as the philosoph he was, stop insulting him too, and try seeing what's interesting in his books, because "nobody's perfect", and if you just pay attention to perfect men... well, i can understand why you think it's not worth reading my posts. I think it's interesting to read the Quran or the Bible, even if i don't like religions, and i suggest you could think about it. Schumann was at the end crazy too... Is his music uninteresting? I think i made complex (ow, complex) music, that someone crazy could not make... And Nerval was crazy as he wrote. But he is considered as a "genie" (english word?)... The fact Nietzsche became crazy is a pretext not to consider his ideas, which are considered as not normal. Perhaps you...
But, i don't want to continue. If you want to say i'm egocentric or else... well, you can. "ad hominem" attack. I'm not here to lecture, but if you don't communicate with me, it's the impression you give. Communication, it's with two people. Right? I'm not going to answer anymore about anything else as philosophy.

To Nadine and Gigi: if you feeled insulted by my way of "explaining", i apologize.
And to Gigi: I'll answer you, if Jean Fred agrees, since you asked about my point of view, but in the evening.

Salut ^^
Olivier.