News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Meaningness. Parent comment

Re:Meaningness by danharaj on Friday December 09, 2016 @06:18PM (#13142733)
It also definitely does not explain at all the material relations of society that have been grounded in religious rituals and practices throughout history. In a materialist analysis of religion, it is the role religion plays in mediating relations of economic activity and power that determine the structure of religion. There's something compelling about such an argument: It explains why religion's prominence in a society fades as it becomes less entwined with economy and politics.

This idealism as opposed to materialism seems to be prominent throughout what I've skimmed of this site.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Meaningness by clock_tower on Friday December 09, 2016 @08:25PM (#13143434)
I'd add that you can be a religious believer, but still use and recognize materialist analyses of religion -- including your own religion. As an obvious and non-controversial example, any religion that finds itself widely believed in a world without central authorities is going to be pressed into service as an enforcer of oaths -- even if its founder's opinion of oaths was somewhere between jaded and openly hostile.

Are you familiar with Marvin Harris (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Harris)? I think he draws his causal arrow backwards -- it's not that a society develops ways of thinking because they'd be adaptive, it's that societies that happen to develop adaptive ways of thinking flourish -- but it's fascinating to watch his style of analysis in action, and he makes more good points than bad ones... at least if you ask me.

[ Parent | on HN ]