Originally posted by Patient_Leech
It's a complicated question, but in short, no. Those who find their way out of religion are no worse for it, and in fact (speaking from personal experience) are much more free and open to experience in a much more positive way. Humans will continue to do human things, good and bad. But what they won't do anymore without religion is waste perfectly good energy debating or spreading dogmatic and nonsensical theology. They also won't be convinced to do harm in the name of religion thinking that it is good.Yes. We know that severe weather is not punishment from a god. Or that seizures are not demon possession. Just examples of how traditional religious thinking is no longer useful.
I mostly agree with the first chunk of your response.
On the second part of your response, I don't mean a god of the gaps style progression of knowledge, I mean a replacement that is a comprehensive system of ideas.
For example, how do you feel about this ?
Based on these premises
1.) We both exist.
2.) The senses have the capacity for accuracy.
3.) Language has the capacity for meaning.
4.) Correction requires universal preferences.
5.) An objective methodology exists for separating truth from falsehood.
6.) Truth is better than falsehood.
7.) Peaceful debating is the best way to resolve disputes.
8.) Individuals are responsible for their actions.
Then this theory of morality is true.
1.) Reality is objective and consistent.
2.) “Logic” is the set of objective and consistent rules derived from the consistency of reality.
3.) Those theories that conform to logic are called “valid.”
4.) Those theories that are confirmed by empirical testing are called “accurate.”
5.) Those theories that are both valid and accurate are called “true.”
6.) “Preferences” are required for life, thought, language and debating.
7.) Debating requires that both parties hold “truth” to be both objective and universally preferable.
8.) Thus the very act of debating contains an acceptance of universally preferable behaviour (UPB).
9.) Theories regarding UPB must pass the tests of logical consistency and empirical verification.
10.)'The subset of UPB that examines enforceable behaviour is called “morality.”
11.) As a subset of UPB, no moral theory can be considered true if it is illogical or unsupported by empirical evidence.
12.) Moral theories that are supported by logic and evidence are true. All other moral theories are false.
And from these premises and parameters you can figure things out like: the nonaggression principle and that; murder, rape, theft, lying, and fraud are wrong.