Christian moralists Essay

According to Freud, they ar fulfillments of the oldest, strongest, and roughly urgent wishes of mankind the secret of their strength lies in the strength of their wishes (Pals 72). For him, the only way to test something is by the scientific method (Pals 72). The believers of godliness draw their corporate trust from feelings and emotions (Pals 72). He mentioned that it was a given that righteousness may have armed serviceed build civilizations however, since civilizations were already built, superstition and repression should not continue to be the foundation (Pals 72).According to Freud faith would thus be the universal obsessional neurosis of humanity (Pals 73). In his perception, mature race are those guided by reason and science and not by mere superstition and faith (Pals 73). deity, for this thinker, was not a being that was authoritative (Pals 73). In fact, he saying beau ideal as an legerdemain that was closely projected by the self because they had a deep lo nging to over come out guilt and to lessen their fears (Pals 73). trust may be something that is rooted from the ego to be open to make sense of the struggles that are give way in the world.But it is to a greater extent than near a bunch of feelings and emotions because those fade. Religion has been around for centuries and that usher outnot be because some of the people around the world have felt give care believing in immortal for each(prenominal) these years. Hope has in fact been seen to be built on nothing barely illusion in reality, it exists because of faith (Palmer 279). Faith cannot exist without ethics. However, Christian moralists would serene balk true to the fact that with hope in their lives, it would be significant and have moral worth (Palmer 279).Critics of piety would say that morality would depend on the need of a psychologically realistic foundation that calls for human purposes (Palmer 279). Going back to the question be earlier, if it was intim ately feelings and emotions, hence religious belief should have been re placed by money or by other things. regular(a) though in this secular world, most of religions areas are penetrated by much(prenominal) things, it still prevails for a reason because people have faith. Majority of the people in the world believe in divinity fudge, does this mean only a part of the human population are mature people?If the strength of religion lies in the strength of its wishers, how come faithless people have come to know deity because of the things that happen in their hold lives that they would consider nothing short of a miracle (Pals 72). If everything can be time-tested by the scientific method, it should have tested why people fall in love or why people can risk their lives to rescue someone else. How come students from the direst of neighborhoods can graduate from exalted school despite everything that could hinder him or her? Was it determination and hope? Where did those qualiti es come from?Is it the illusion of the people that divinity fudge had always been able to provide for them yet if they felt that all is lost and has ended? Is it an illusion that the solarize rises in the morning and that planets are held in their axis and revolve around there orbit? If religion is just something for a person to overcome guilt, how come people have to place such emotions of God while there are a whole surge of other things that are more tangible that people can turn to? Why not you rely on something can see if that intend having to have a better impression of that illusion. Religion from SocietyFollowing Emile Durkheims point of collect relating religion with sociology, morality was perceived to be the obligation of each other to others wherein it cannot be separated from religion (Pals 95). Religion and morals mesh together in a social framework (Pals 95). Under his views, the achievement of the religious leader does not lie in the number of converts he h ad brought in the congregation but the event that has reinstated a sense of community amongst the people (Pals 95). Durkheim believed that Religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices congress to sacred things, that is to say, set apart and forbidden (Pals 99).When he talked about sacred things he referred to unite in one moral community called church and those who adhere them (Pals 99). Sacred things referred to the issues of the community while those that are not sacred referred to the private things and the everyday things a person encounters (Pals 99). Under Durkheims view of religion, it was more like a ball club. The idea of caller is the soul of religion because the concept of religion needed the ball club in order to exist. It was based on creating a sense of belongingness.Society was organise by the collective committedness of the individuals because without such commitment the society would fail to exist. In the same way, religion exists merely because a lot of people are committed to the fact that it does exist. Like Freud, he referred to Totemism as an example of how society gave brook to religion. Freud truism how religion is exactly just like society, in comparison, the rituals and the rites and the church leaders can be seen as a mere superficial or surface part of religion because it is just a consistency of collective beliefs and practices that are endowed by such some kind of authority.This thinker also believed that there was nothing neither divine nor supernatural because he saw that it was just society that produced this concept in order to keep people in line and to give emphasis on true things that the society should value as a whole. Society had survived from civilizations that have started in the past. The question whether how religion was formed was important to answer because defines the further need for it. Is it a mere creation of man that humanity exists? If not, then why did it exist because of the perseveranc e of the human spirit?Where did this perseverance come from, more than that, where did the spirit come from? These are things the society cannot really provide for them if the premise is society gave birth to religion. Alienation Karl Marx, of all the thinkers in the past may have presented one of the most scornful and sarcastic contempt at religion (Pals 139). Most of the discussion about religion from this philosopher referred to religion as alienation. He never really just concentrated on discussing religion alone but his works have shown how he had pretty more than a heavy opinion about it and that influenced the grammatical construction of Communism.It was plain and simple for Marx, religion is pure illusion (Pals 138). Similar to how Freud saw religion, Marx saw it more than an illusion but something that was dangerous and something that should be eradicated from society (Pals 138). He considered religion as the worst kind of ideology because of how it expressed a perceived bunch of excuses dressed to kill(p) as reasons in order to keep society in the manner that their oppression would like them to stay as (Pals 138). Religion is then related to a tool of oppression instead of being a liberating factor that most Christian ideals adhere to.Since he was consumed with how he taught a capitalist society brought about oppression he saw religion as merely another factor to keep people in line and to prevent them from having to go against the leaders of society. Since most of his arguments fall upon his hatred for the Capitalist society, he attacked religion saying it was fully determined by economics that made all the doctrines that was attributed to it to have no merits of their own (Pals 138). Since he had no respect for that kind of system, he did not see much of the structure and nature of religion as well (Pals 138).Marx found a profound parallelism between religion and socioeconomics wherein he saw how both areas of society alienated people from impor tant parts of who they were (Pals 140). While religion took moral values socioeconomics took productive labor (Pals 140-141). Religion took a way a part of the people, the morality part as humans and attributed it to a wholly imaginary being (Pals 141). Marx saw how it took away the creed from the people and awarded everything to God (Pals 141). On the other hand, socioeconomics took away the fruits of the labor of the people and awarded it to whoever had the money to pay, mostly to the full-bodied (Pals 141).Marx saw how these two concepts were too much alike because of how they were related to each other. Like Durkheim, he saw that the capitalist society created religion as economics was the base for everything. He then moved for the abolition of religion under the Communist ideology as this was considered an illusory happiness (Pals 141). According to him, the abolition of religion was actually required for real happiness to occur (Pals 141). He saw that religion did not help t he people, most especially the poor.For him, religion only created fantasies for the people that enabled them to ease the pain they felt from the oppression of society (Pals 141). He saw religion as the opium of the poor (Pals 140). He illustrated religion as nothing more than being addiction to any form of drug (Pals 142). It may be a form of efflux that would make a person worry-free for a while but it does not serve anything (Pals 142). He saw religion as pure escapism (Pals 142). Religion, for Marx, only shifted the gaze of the people and their reliance on God instead of having to rely upon themselves for their own well-being (Pals 142).However, he also said that it blinded the people from the real injustice of the material, physical situation they had in society because they were much to focus on fixing their fleck life or their eternal life in heaven to be worried about their legitimate stature on earth (Pals 142). The fact that religion was seen to oppress can be reflected in preposterous leadership on the part of the Church in the past but it cannot generalize the whole body of believers. If a person works for this current life with disregard for the consequences of the next life, what is he to gain? Is he to be satisfied?No person had ever found the ultimate satisfaction, no matter how sound they work or how wealthy they are, this cannot be attained in the present life. Whoever says he or she can must be fooling him or herself. Reliance on a supreme being is placed in the fiber of human nature for a reason, because they need God. It is not to oppress them to being bemused beings. It actually empowers them to be the best that they can become with the help from their creator. Conclusion No matter what such thinkers present regarding the false hopes and the perception of believers regarding religion, there are still so much areas that remain undisputed.thither are still areas in the field of religion that remain to be untouched and simply ignored. The areas that cannot be explained cannot be test by scientific explanation. at that place are areas that can be denied that they exist even if they dispute that religion does not. If religion was birthed out of society, and there are a lot of atheists that can closely form a community out of themselves, how come they do not just create their own society that could affect the society of believers in the world?The argument about faith and the existence of God had been a long withstanding debate for centuries now and still, the world still contain a large body of believers that are willing to put faith first before reason. Does this make these people unintelligent beings? There had been thinkers as well who had defended the faith that had chosen to believe because they saw how reason cannot overcome everything, only faith can do that. The existence of religion cannot only be out of the desires of the leaders to keep society in line. It takes more than human power to be able to sust ain this for centuries.If it was placed in the hold of mere humans, then there must have been a time wherein atheists have struggled for power and took the reigns of society to reverse the mindset. The protection around the concept of religion speaks tons for itself. It takes divine power to be able to stay significant for centuries for different peoples all over the world.Works Cited Pals, Daniel L. Seven Theories of Religion. New York Oxford University Press, 1996 Palmer, Michael. The question of God An introduction and Sourcebook. New York Routledge, 2001.