Quizzes & Puzzles38 mins ago
Finally, And By Special Request;
122 Answers
Is a non-provable 'untruth' that makes a person happy, and gives a sense of well-being, not better than a non-provable 'truth' that makes a person feel unhappily jejune?
(please note the words untruth and truth are in quotation marks.)
(please note the words untruth and truth are in quotation marks.)
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Oh dear, guilt plagues me. Having asked Khandro to start this thread I then got involved in an emergency and am therefore coming in very late. Still, here goes:
The question is an empty one since it uses two expressions ‘non-provable untruth’ and ‘non-provable truth’ both of which are meaningless. If a thing is non-provable then it cannot be classified as either a truth or an untruth.
I could leave it there, but I sense, as others have done, that what Khandro really means although clumsily expressed, is : is a lie that gives comfort better than a truth which brings immaturity, spiritlessness or meagreness (depending on which definition of ‘jejune’ he intended). The ‘non-provable’, and the quotation marks are just a disguise.
But even that question is pretty empty because it specifies extremes while leaving out the vast middle. Rather like: “Is it better to have lost both legs and be happy or to be fully fit and miserable?” To which a sensible answer would be. “Don’t know. I’m glad I’m both fully fit and happy.”
I, for one, am a very happy man, living with truths, untruths and the non-provable either way.
The question is an empty one since it uses two expressions ‘non-provable untruth’ and ‘non-provable truth’ both of which are meaningless. If a thing is non-provable then it cannot be classified as either a truth or an untruth.
I could leave it there, but I sense, as others have done, that what Khandro really means although clumsily expressed, is : is a lie that gives comfort better than a truth which brings immaturity, spiritlessness or meagreness (depending on which definition of ‘jejune’ he intended). The ‘non-provable’, and the quotation marks are just a disguise.
But even that question is pretty empty because it specifies extremes while leaving out the vast middle. Rather like: “Is it better to have lost both legs and be happy or to be fully fit and miserable?” To which a sensible answer would be. “Don’t know. I’m glad I’m both fully fit and happy.”
I, for one, am a very happy man, living with truths, untruths and the non-provable either way.
Provable or not, there is a 'truth' and people are entitled to their opinion of what that may be but the nub of Khandros post is around basing one's preferred version purely on it being nicer and more comforting which, even if it is done unknowingly, is emotionally weak and logically invalid.
Try to apply this reasoning to any other question:- "The answer is XXXX because if the answer was YYYY it would make me feel sad".
"I am sad because water is denser than air, if it were the other way round I would be so happy - some of the physical properties of this universe make me sad. The speed of light makes me very happy though! It's just ridiculous because these things just 'are' so nobody is made sad or happy by them, so why should they be made sad or happy by where they came from?
So, no I don't think it is 'better' or 'worse' to need a God to make one happier, it is just weaker, but weak people are entitled to happiness too so carry on.
Try to apply this reasoning to any other question:- "The answer is XXXX because if the answer was YYYY it would make me feel sad".
"I am sad because water is denser than air, if it were the other way round I would be so happy - some of the physical properties of this universe make me sad. The speed of light makes me very happy though! It's just ridiculous because these things just 'are' so nobody is made sad or happy by them, so why should they be made sad or happy by where they came from?
So, no I don't think it is 'better' or 'worse' to need a God to make one happier, it is just weaker, but weak people are entitled to happiness too so carry on.
Using suicide rates as a measure of happiness seems slightly drastic :)
Many people have explored the link between religiosity and health and well- being, with mixed results. Does faith have a protective effect against suicidal impulses? The paper that Khandro quotes suggests it does, but although it finds a correlation, that does not of itself imply causation. Other studies have demonstrated a correlation between obesity and a reduction in the suicide rate, but again there is little evidence as to what is actually going on. Again, a correlation throws up something interesting, but does not itself offer causation.
And the suicidal iimpulse and its rates is a complex issue - the desire to commit suicide is more often than not multifactorial, and things like low esteem, estrangement, lack of purpose, bullying, the desire not to be a burden to your partner or family - lots and lots of reasons are given.
Some see a correlation between a low suicide rate and a high national religiosity, as in several Muslim countries - but give the stigma attached to suicide, it is entirely possible that other causes of death are reported, to save shame etc. The reasons why people commit suicide differs according to age range and gender, too. And around 30% of all globally reported suicides occur in China and India - mostly because of the size of their populations.
What is important is that people have some resources to fall back on - strong family bonds often help, or string links to the community, or an interest group, or access to services like the samaritans - and where religion can help would be the sense of community that is often engendered.
So the take home message is not so much that faith of itself is protective, more that the community ties and family bonds help enormously, and that is a message that we can learn from in more developed countries where religion is on the wane - it is probably good for your mental health if you can create strong bonds with community, family and friends.
Faith, religion - has also been cited as cause for suicide - in those countries where religious teaching has demonised sexuality for instance, young male homosexuals have cited that bigotry and intolerance as a cause of their suicide attempt.
It is straying a bit off-topic though. You still have not demonstrated that having a faith in a mythical being confers a sense of happiness that those who simply do not believe that narrative cannot experience.
Even were you to prove the correlation, which might lead to the conclusion that we would all be better off believing in god, there are several studies around that demonstrate that crime rates are lower in atheist societies, or that homicide rates are higher in strongly religious countries.
Problem with all of these studies is that it is easy to see a correlation ,but not so easy to strip out all the confounding factors......
Many people have explored the link between religiosity and health and well- being, with mixed results. Does faith have a protective effect against suicidal impulses? The paper that Khandro quotes suggests it does, but although it finds a correlation, that does not of itself imply causation. Other studies have demonstrated a correlation between obesity and a reduction in the suicide rate, but again there is little evidence as to what is actually going on. Again, a correlation throws up something interesting, but does not itself offer causation.
And the suicidal iimpulse and its rates is a complex issue - the desire to commit suicide is more often than not multifactorial, and things like low esteem, estrangement, lack of purpose, bullying, the desire not to be a burden to your partner or family - lots and lots of reasons are given.
Some see a correlation between a low suicide rate and a high national religiosity, as in several Muslim countries - but give the stigma attached to suicide, it is entirely possible that other causes of death are reported, to save shame etc. The reasons why people commit suicide differs according to age range and gender, too. And around 30% of all globally reported suicides occur in China and India - mostly because of the size of their populations.
What is important is that people have some resources to fall back on - strong family bonds often help, or string links to the community, or an interest group, or access to services like the samaritans - and where religion can help would be the sense of community that is often engendered.
So the take home message is not so much that faith of itself is protective, more that the community ties and family bonds help enormously, and that is a message that we can learn from in more developed countries where religion is on the wane - it is probably good for your mental health if you can create strong bonds with community, family and friends.
Faith, religion - has also been cited as cause for suicide - in those countries where religious teaching has demonised sexuality for instance, young male homosexuals have cited that bigotry and intolerance as a cause of their suicide attempt.
It is straying a bit off-topic though. You still have not demonstrated that having a faith in a mythical being confers a sense of happiness that those who simply do not believe that narrative cannot experience.
Even were you to prove the correlation, which might lead to the conclusion that we would all be better off believing in god, there are several studies around that demonstrate that crime rates are lower in atheist societies, or that homicide rates are higher in strongly religious countries.
Problem with all of these studies is that it is easy to see a correlation ,but not so easy to strip out all the confounding factors......
LG; So are you are suggesting that a country with an abnormally high suicide rate could still be deemed to be 'happy'?
It is unsurprising that the countries with the highest populations have the highest suicides (and most other things).
The only person to have addressed my question properly -which contains no mention of God, by the way, - (when I posed it first on your thread 'Is Religious Belief Irrational?') was v_e when he referred us to the story of Brahmin and the washerwoman which you can see on; nhttp://www.online-literature.com/voltaire/4411/
It is unsurprising that the countries with the highest populations have the highest suicides (and most other things).
The only person to have addressed my question properly -which contains no mention of God, by the way, - (when I posed it first on your thread 'Is Religious Belief Irrational?') was v_e when he referred us to the story of Brahmin and the washerwoman which you can see on; nhttp://www.online-literature.com/voltaire/4411/
@ Khandro
"The only person who has addressed your question properly? "
If you consider that the responses that have been offered miss your point, you should, i would submit, first consider whether the way your question was phrased was clear enough, rather than castigating all those that have taken the time to frame a response!
Once again, you sound like a patient teacher addressing a classroom of unruly and rather dim children - you know, pompous,judgemental and downright offensive....
Whats an abnormally high suicide rate? Is there such a thing as a normal suicide rate? Who gets to decide that? What data are they basing that upon?Because not all countries report their suicide rates; and certainly in some countries, suicides are not reported as such, because of the stigma. So how can any firm conclusions of the sort you are attempting to draw be made?
I am not sure you should apply a label such as "happy "to an entire country - it would be stereotypical, and a patronisingly sweeping generalisation. You can attempt to construct a "Happiness Index", such as Cameron is trying to promote - a means of gauging the nations well- being other than by straightforward economic indicators, but judging an entire countries mood and mental health based upon the suicide rate would be stupid.
We are getting off topic anywa - I bet your pardon, O mighty one ; I should say what I consider to be the point of your OP .
You posit the premise that faith automatically offers its adherents a greater sense of happiness and well being; And that even if that faith has no provable evidence base to support it, the benefits conferred upon that society outweigh the fact that their faith is based upon no evidence, or perhaps even a lie. So, we should encourage and/or embrace faith because of this benefit.
I do not believe you have made the case. You cannot just arbitrarily declare that faith brings a sense of happiness or well being that others without faith cannot experience, because you have no objective means or evidence to demonstrate that.
Nor can the suicide rate be used as the exclusive measure of a nations "Happiness Index", because of the complex confounding factors that surround what is such a personal and individual decision to end your life - and also because that same society that perhaps has a lower suicide rate in comparison to other, similar countries, may also have , for exanple,a comparatively high homicide rate, and/or high poverty index, or low educational standards, or high unemployment.
Faith has traditionally fostered a sense of community and a group identity and I agree that those are good for human society. For those societies where religion is on the wane, those bonds of community and identity will need to be replaced by something else - but there are plenty of alternatives available to the secular, that can ultimately be just as fulfilling, and do not come with the burden of having to believe a myth, or circumscribe your activities based upon an arbitrary code that has little relevance to modern culture.....
"The only person who has addressed your question properly? "
If you consider that the responses that have been offered miss your point, you should, i would submit, first consider whether the way your question was phrased was clear enough, rather than castigating all those that have taken the time to frame a response!
Once again, you sound like a patient teacher addressing a classroom of unruly and rather dim children - you know, pompous,judgemental and downright offensive....
Whats an abnormally high suicide rate? Is there such a thing as a normal suicide rate? Who gets to decide that? What data are they basing that upon?Because not all countries report their suicide rates; and certainly in some countries, suicides are not reported as such, because of the stigma. So how can any firm conclusions of the sort you are attempting to draw be made?
I am not sure you should apply a label such as "happy "to an entire country - it would be stereotypical, and a patronisingly sweeping generalisation. You can attempt to construct a "Happiness Index", such as Cameron is trying to promote - a means of gauging the nations well- being other than by straightforward economic indicators, but judging an entire countries mood and mental health based upon the suicide rate would be stupid.
We are getting off topic anywa - I bet your pardon, O mighty one ; I should say what I consider to be the point of your OP .
You posit the premise that faith automatically offers its adherents a greater sense of happiness and well being; And that even if that faith has no provable evidence base to support it, the benefits conferred upon that society outweigh the fact that their faith is based upon no evidence, or perhaps even a lie. So, we should encourage and/or embrace faith because of this benefit.
I do not believe you have made the case. You cannot just arbitrarily declare that faith brings a sense of happiness or well being that others without faith cannot experience, because you have no objective means or evidence to demonstrate that.
Nor can the suicide rate be used as the exclusive measure of a nations "Happiness Index", because of the complex confounding factors that surround what is such a personal and individual decision to end your life - and also because that same society that perhaps has a lower suicide rate in comparison to other, similar countries, may also have , for exanple,a comparatively high homicide rate, and/or high poverty index, or low educational standards, or high unemployment.
Faith has traditionally fostered a sense of community and a group identity and I agree that those are good for human society. For those societies where religion is on the wane, those bonds of community and identity will need to be replaced by something else - but there are plenty of alternatives available to the secular, that can ultimately be just as fulfilling, and do not come with the burden of having to believe a myth, or circumscribe your activities based upon an arbitrary code that has little relevance to modern culture.....
Khandro, //The only person to have addressed my question properly …..was v_e when he referred us to the story of Brahmin and the washerwoman//
VE didn’t address your question at all. He simply asked you in one line if you’d read the story. He made no further comment. Your problem seems to be that you’re not getting answers you want to hear.
VE didn’t address your question at all. He simply asked you in one line if you’d read the story. He made no further comment. Your problem seems to be that you’re not getting answers you want to hear.
I have already indicated what I found offensive. Your dismissal of all responses, other than V-Es, which, as Naomi pointed out, was not actually an answer so much as a comment.Nor do you make any attempt to point out where people have "misunderstood" your point. It is far more likely that you have expressed yourself poorly.
If you choose to take offence at the tone or vehemence of the rebuttals of some of the barmier and more dedicated defenders of faith on this board, or choose to wear a hat that says "weak minded and deluded", feel free to do so. just as I feel free to take offence at the condescension in your response @ 23:20
If you choose to take offence at the tone or vehemence of the rebuttals of some of the barmier and more dedicated defenders of faith on this board, or choose to wear a hat that says "weak minded and deluded", feel free to do so. just as I feel free to take offence at the condescension in your response @ 23:20
LG; If you read above you will see that in no way did I say v_e's reference to Voltaire was an 'answer', I said it addressed the question.
If this gives you offence, to quote yourself; "feel free".
ll_billym; Not everything, even religion, is predicated on God.
nescio; It was entered as a quote, you may have to take it up with the American Journal of Psychiatry.
If this gives you offence, to quote yourself; "feel free".
ll_billym; Not everything, even religion, is predicated on God.
nescio; It was entered as a quote, you may have to take it up with the American Journal of Psychiatry.
Khandro, three things.
//in no way did I say v_e's reference to Voltaire was an 'answer', I said it addressed the question.//
VE’s reference did not address your question at all.
//Not everything, even religion, is predicated on God.//
Why are you banging on about religion then?
//It was entered as a quote, you may have to take it up with the American Journal of Psychiatry.//
The ‘quote’ was posted specifically to support the case you were making. Therefore the onus is upon you to explain it.
Perhaps you ought to have a think.
//in no way did I say v_e's reference to Voltaire was an 'answer', I said it addressed the question.//
VE’s reference did not address your question at all.
//Not everything, even religion, is predicated on God.//
Why are you banging on about religion then?
//It was entered as a quote, you may have to take it up with the American Journal of Psychiatry.//
The ‘quote’ was posted specifically to support the case you were making. Therefore the onus is upon you to explain it.
Perhaps you ought to have a think.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles39 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles40 mins ago
ChatterBank70 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles73 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.