You make very valid points, but my question is; are these things necessarily bad for everyone? I agree with you that prayer is objectively pointless and a waste of time, that people plugged into their televisions are wasting their lives from a common perspective. But why should we care? I suppose on a utilitarian basis they are wasting our resources, wasting our air, our petrol, but then who are we to judge that their lifestyle is objectively less valid then our own?
Not everyone is ready to leave the Matrix. I guess that's what I'm trying to say. It's easy for us; from our armchairs, to imagine everyone as considerate, responsible, thoughtful, intelligent & altruistic once all the pipe dreams have faded - but the chances of that actually happening I think are next to zero. So while the principles of (most) religions may in essence be false, if everyone knows in their hearts that they are going to die, there is no saviour & we're just animals - some people won't be able to cope.
From there you can enter the debate of "well... do they deserve to survive if they can't cope with the world? or is religion/couch potato a valid haven for the 'weak'?"
So many people who attack Christianity look at science as the answer. Science rarely factors human emotion into things - unless looking at it directly. Spirituality addresses emotion and that more intangible side to our existence, so I think both are just as important in the survival of our species. Unless we want to end up living like they do in the film Equilibrium, and if you've seen it I think the title itself is alluding to the equilibrium between spirituality, emotion and on the other hand science.
Thanks for responding;
You make very valid points, but my question is; are these things necessarily bad for everyone? I agree with you that prayer is objectively pointless and a waste of time, that people plugged into their televisions are wasting their lives from a common perspective. But why should we care? I suppose on a utilitarian basis they are wasting our resources, wasting our air, our petrol, but then who are we to judge that their lifestyle is objectively less valid then our own?
Not everyone is ready to leave the Matrix. I guess that's what I'm trying to say. It's easy for us; from our armchairs, to imagine everyone as considerate, responsible, thoughtful, intelligent & altruistic once all the pipe dreams have faded - but the chances of that actually happening I think are next to zero. So while the principles of (most) religions may in essence be false, if everyone knows in their hearts that they are going to die, there is no saviour & we're just animals - some people won't be able to cope.
From there you can enter the debate of "well... do they deserve to survive if they can't cope with the world? or is religion/couch potato a valid haven for the 'weak'?"
So many people who attack Christianity look at science as the answer. Science rarely factors human emotion into things - unless looking at it directly. Spirituality addresses emotion and that more intangible side to our existence, so I think both are just as important in the survival of our species. Unless we want to end up living like they do in the film Equilibrium, and if you've seen it I think the title itself is alluding to the equilibrium between spirituality, emotion and on the other hand science.