Taboo subject No 2: Religion is a virus.

.tUrniP wrote:

Quote :

The difference being that a virus is necessarily negative whereas a meme is not [necessarily negative].

Other than that, are you asking if I think belief is genetic or cognitive? Are people genetically predisposed to believe or is it their conscious choice?

... can't you just tell me?

Seeing as you raised and interesting question. Do you think belief is genetic or cognitive and also do you think people are genticaly predisposed to believe? Or do those people who believe, do so on the basis of following set social norms?

Bear in mind, I can't really tell you what I think 'thought' is (or what 'is' is for that matter).

I think that if genetic predisposition were 'proven' it would suggest (according to certain interpretations of evolutionary theory) that belief in God hinders our survival (since the trend seems to be away from).

It is, of course, more complicated than that.

By definition I think that belief in anything is psychological.

So... "Are people genetically predisposed to believe or is it their conscious choice?" ...maybe both?

Quote :

Or do those people who believe, do so on the basis of following set social norms?

I'd argue that fitting in encourages faux belief; nothing more.

--

What was your original question though?

Original question was: is religion a mental virus?

If you accept memetics then, I guess, yes, it could be said to be; Otherwise no.

Since a virus, a pathogen, by definition causes disease to the host the question of good and bad (or maybe bad and not bad) was a valid one. The idea attempts to paint religion as detrimental in it's entirey, hence my other comment about arrogance and ambiguity. It needs to be more specific in my opinion; a difficult task considering the spectrum of belief.

Dawkin's own position of atheism should logically come under his same classification. I don't know if he thinks the same?

A virus or pathogen does not always cause a disease in its host, its host can be used to pass it on without affecting the host.

Religion is not always viewed the same either. One may view it as an attack on religion another not so. We do not all view the same thing as the same thing.

Fair point...

Regardless the aggregate effect is negative, therefore any classification as "virus" is a derogatory one.

I'm not entirley sure I understand your second bit though.