FSTDT Forums
Community => Religion and Philosophy => Topic started by: Distind on February 08, 2012, 08:37:55 am
-
Something that's been rattling around my mind for a while now, while the separation between church and state is a reasonable goal, just how different are religion and politics?
Now, I was born right around when the time the 'Silent majority' lost it's god damn mind and decided it should be running America, while neither being silent, or a majority. At least as far as I've ever been able to tell. So that may well be coloring my view of things. But I do have an interest in history, and from my digging most major political movements here in the US can be traced back to a religious group, affiliation, or even lack there of. While it flags off a bit in the last few decades, and actually ramped up a bit in the US after a major reformation of US churches(ironically largely promoted by women, who weren't supposed to speak up during it) well after the revolution. But, even when a religious affiliation isn't involved, don't any such beliefs largely shape your view of the world as well as your expectations of your government?
Similarly, through out history major political moves have fractured congregations and formed entire new religious movements based as much around a political ideal as much as their own holy scriptures(see the prosperity gospel). From the early protestant church down to our own beloved evangelicals, most of these transformations were based more on political differences than doctrinal. So I'm getting lost on just how we could manage a separation of Church and State.
Though right now watching the republican primary I'm wondering if religion is just politics with a promised afterlife. Makes me shudder to think of something like this happening for eternity.
Even with those of us who are atheist, one of our larger political concerns is not being bound by someone else's religion due to legal process. The only way I can really think of doing that is pointing out just how little of the world works the way religions generally say they do, and the creationist movement can show you just how well that generally ends.
But, really, what are the big differences between religion and politics, what have been the differences in the past? It seems like both are massive clumps of self interest that no single person can manage to make a dent in without forming their own massive clump of self interest.
-
The big difference between religion and politics is that one is esoteric, and the other is just plain nuts.
...Please excuse me as I don't quite know which is which yet.
But joking aside, really, religion is organized belief. And it seems like any time you have organization, politics ensue.
-
Politics predates sentience.
-
I was thinking politics as simple as leadership and stuff in the distant past. I mean our ancestors had to have someone planning for the group's survival and stuff, right?
-
Serious answer: Politicking precedes the human race, as "tribes' of animals, particularly simians like gorillas, baboons, etc have an established "pecking order" with complex relationships, leadership, etc based on whoever appears to be the strongest. Animals are not known for having a religion of their own, so the serious answer is "politics", as the animal kingdom clearly predates humans.
Answer I gave: Come on. I couldn't not pick Egg.
-
Politics. Rather simple politics, but politics.
-
Everyone knows it was the egg that came first to give us the tasty omelets of justice.
-
A much smarter man then I once said, Religion without faith is politics.
I'm going to say that Religion came first. I don't really see simple hierarchies as political. Politics has to be more then just do as I say. I think that at some point religious leaders figured out that by using religion they could control even those with more power than themselves.
Look at the laws of the old testament. Preventing the Jews form marrying from outside the tribes prevented outside influences. Circumcision helped identified the male population. The threats of stoning people for all types of offenses kept people in line.
Perhaps that is why it is so hard to separate the two, they really do go hand in hand very well.
-
I really think it's impossible to know which came first.
I'm going to say that Religion came first. I don't really see simple hierarchies as political. Politics has to be more then just do as I say. I think that at some point religious leaders figured out that by using religion they could control even those with more power than themselves.
You don't need a hierarchy for politics to come to be introduced. You'll find politics in group interactions regardless of if they are egalatarian or hierarchical.
-
I didn't say you need a hierarchy for politics. I said I did not see simple hierarchies as politics. Yes, you do find hierarchies in many animal populations, I just don't think those are in the political realm.
-
I'm going to guess that they both evolved around the same time. Yes, there has always been the need for a strong leader who could tell stronger men to hit saber tooth tigers over the head with clubs and tell the women to shut up and get back in the caves and make with the andwiches. But then, there has always been the need for the spiritual man who knows how to make sky gods happy and not scare his people with thunder and who knows which beast sacrifice will bribe the rain god to make it rain and how to get the god of clubs to help out those unfortunate saber tooth tiger clubbers. And I really don't see how the tribe could choose a leader without the high priest's blessing. So maybe they were the early power brokers. Sort of the behind the scenes puppet masters, if the had puppets back then. Anyways, those are my two cents.
-
Post-animism religion is usually a sort of an analogy for politics most times. Most deities resemble petty kings and lords except in hunter gatherer societies where you have Tiddalik the Frog, Oshadagea the Dew Eagle Spirit and Pele the Volcano Goddess where the gods represent natural phenomena and animals.
The god most resembling a bad tempered king for my money is Yahweh!
-
Politics is readily observed among tribal species. Arguing for religion among them would be very difficult.
-
Politics came first, because any organization of more than one person is political in some way. Religion came later when people tripped balls and had all sorts of stories to tell. Then that came full circle back into politics when someone found out how to use those stories to control people.
Well, technically the egg came first, but it wasn't until religion that it was called a person.
-
I didn't say you need a hierarchy for politics. I said I did not see simple hierarchies as politics. Yes, you do find hierarchies in many animal populations, I just don't think those are in the political realm.
What about when you have various individuals fighting for the top spot?
-
Indeed, I would consider an animal hierarchy to be political in nature, due to the fact that animals have been observed to do the following to gain the top spot:
1) Sabotage (or kill) rivals physically.
2) Use under-handed tricks to take them out of the spot.
3) Try to impress the others enough to trust him/her.
Sounds like politics to me.
-
Indeed, I would consider an animal hierarchy to be political in nature, due to the fact that animals have been observed to do the following to gain the top spot:
1) Sabotage (or kill) rivals physically.
2) Use under-handed tricks to take them out of the spot.
3) Try to impress the others enough to trust him/her.
Sounds like politics to me.
Sure does. But it also sounds like some aspects of religion.
-
Indeed, I would consider an animal hierarchy to be political in nature, due to the fact that animals have been observed to do the following to gain the top spot:
1) Sabotage (or kill) rivals physically.
2) Use under-handed tricks to take them out of the spot.
3) Try to impress the others enough to trust him/her.
Sounds like politics to me.
Sure does. But it also sounds like some aspects of religion.
The organisation aspect sure. Theological (which is what makes a religion a religion), not so much.