One criticism: You may have over explained it. I'm not sure if I'm getting it correctly.
Mind you, I'm no Marxist scholar, but here is what I got:
Religion is like opium(alcohol, weed, video games), when it's used as a coping mechanism to escape reality, or to dull pain. People are struggling to come to terms with the surrounding evil (injustice, vice). Understandably, despite trying their best, some things are beyond their ability to control. Marx is not against this use of religiousness in practical terms. People can rely on it as a crutch, if they have no willpower to resist injustice, or are stuck with no good choices.
On the other hand, Organized Religion is mostly a parasitic system, that may occasionally do good things, but mostly just resists progress, and siphons wealth. This type of religion is a hindrance.
The last type of religion – is better described as faith. It's basically everything the society holds up as virtuous and encourages in individual members.
The predicted evolution would work something like:
Improve material conditions of people and create more just societies. The improvements to livelihood should eventually leave only the third usage. The better conditions would reduce the need for the utilization of the first type, make the second (organized Religion) weak and irrelevant. The last type will eventually become more of a collection of ideals and values to be working towards, a moral compass for the society.
Oh, and the “nature” of religion has a lot to do with concepts like “repressed memory” and other “sanity safeguards,” so it likely originated involuntarily in people.
Something along those lines, or did I completely butcher it?
hey alexey, not at all, if anything you just broke what i said in simpler terms. it’s often difficult to remove myself from the depths of my own involvement in the matter, so thank you.
Great. No worries! I do the same thing all the time!
When I try to compose informative text, I always end up spending around 50% longer before I'm satisfied with it. I blame my childhood addiction to historical novels and ancient mythology, lol. That style of overburdening the text with "pretty tern of phrase" and multipart sentences. They always jump into my text, unless text, and make reading it very difficult at times. I end up going over it again, and cut out all that “filler” stuff that makes the text sound nice, but turns out looking unusual.
The other problem, is forgetting the reader doesn't always understand all the basics.
Interesting topic.
One criticism: You may have over explained it. I'm not sure if I'm getting it correctly.
Mind you, I'm no Marxist scholar, but here is what I got:
Religion is like opium(alcohol, weed, video games), when it's used as a coping mechanism to escape reality, or to dull pain. People are struggling to come to terms with the surrounding evil (injustice, vice). Understandably, despite trying their best, some things are beyond their ability to control. Marx is not against this use of religiousness in practical terms. People can rely on it as a crutch, if they have no willpower to resist injustice, or are stuck with no good choices.
On the other hand, Organized Religion is mostly a parasitic system, that may occasionally do good things, but mostly just resists progress, and siphons wealth. This type of religion is a hindrance.
The last type of religion – is better described as faith. It's basically everything the society holds up as virtuous and encourages in individual members.
The predicted evolution would work something like:
Improve material conditions of people and create more just societies. The improvements to livelihood should eventually leave only the third usage. The better conditions would reduce the need for the utilization of the first type, make the second (organized Religion) weak and irrelevant. The last type will eventually become more of a collection of ideals and values to be working towards, a moral compass for the society.
Oh, and the “nature” of religion has a lot to do with concepts like “repressed memory” and other “sanity safeguards,” so it likely originated involuntarily in people.
Something along those lines, or did I completely butcher it?
Thank you.
hey alexey, not at all, if anything you just broke what i said in simpler terms. it’s often difficult to remove myself from the depths of my own involvement in the matter, so thank you.
Great. No worries! I do the same thing all the time!
When I try to compose informative text, I always end up spending around 50% longer before I'm satisfied with it. I blame my childhood addiction to historical novels and ancient mythology, lol. That style of overburdening the text with "pretty tern of phrase" and multipart sentences. They always jump into my text, unless text, and make reading it very difficult at times. I end up going over it again, and cut out all that “filler” stuff that makes the text sound nice, but turns out looking unusual.
The other problem, is forgetting the reader doesn't always understand all the basics.