Philosophy Now Forum

I believe the individual religious believer must be entangled with very terrible psychology within his/her psyche.

This is the reason why so many religious believers are willing to commit the most terrible evil and violent acts in the name of their religion.

I believe the psychological forces are inherent in all religious believers, it is just that a majority of religious believers, the so called 'moderates' are able to inhibit those evil forces. Nevertheless they are still vulnerable and certain conditions and stress can weaken those inhibitions and drive them to commit terrible evil and violent acts.

What do you think are the psychological forces involved that drive religious believers to believe in irrational claims that drive them to commit terrible evil and violent acts.

Views?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:40 am I believe the individual religious believer must be entangled with very terrible psychology within his/her psyche.

All humans are. Religion is one fairly popular coping mechanism.

This is the reason why so many religious believers are willing to commit the most terrible evil and violent acts in the name of their religion.

Many, if not most, human beings are not only willing, but eager to behave horribly. Societal rules generally forbid them to act on this inclination. Religion gives them an excuse to go ahead - and protects them from any consequences. So does patriotism.

I believe the psychological forces are inherent in all religious believers,

Psychology is a force in every living thing with a brain. It's inescapable. It gets gummed up, jammed up, hung up, tangled up and fucked up fairly often. The more complex the brain, the more SNAFU's it has to deal with - and the more often it fails to deal with them effectively.

it is just that a majority of religious believers, the so called 'moderates' are able to inhibit those evil forces.

The majority of social animals balance their impulses with their social constraints most of the time. A few societies actually manage to harmonize collective and personal interest so that there is a minimum of conflict.

Nevertheless they are still vulnerable and certain conditions and stress can weaken those inhibitions and drive them to commit terrible evil and violent acts.

Sure.

What do you think are the psychological forces involved that drive religious believers to believe in irrational claims that drive them to commit terrible evil and violent acts.

Mostly fear. They could pretty much manage the fear of predators, environment, disease, hunger and old age in a secure community. When their whole community is insecure, they are at risk to charlatans who offer security - at a price. Like any protection racket: once they sign up, the price keeps rising and they can't get out of the contract. So they convince themselves it's a good thing, the thing they want and love.

Skip wrote: ↑Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:42 am ..

Mostly fear. They could pretty much manage the fear of predators, environment, disease, hunger and old age in a secure community. When their whole community is insecure, they are at risk to charlatans who offer security - at a price. Like any protection racket: once they sign up, the price keeps rising and they can't get out of the contract. So they convince themselves it's a good thing, the thing they want and love.

All your points are well-said.

However I would like to dig deeper and attribute the points with more focus to every individual on the individual basis rather than the collective.

More often when the issues and problems are blamed on the groups, the critical root causes that are relevant are diffused and disappeared into the group and nothing is done thereafter.

Note the recent case where Macron proposed some solutions to tackle the problem of Islamism with a focus on the Freedom of Speech and the Muhammad cartoons.

The response to the above from Erdogan -President of Turkey, was Macron had 'mental illness' and should seek a cure.

• Gravitas: Erdogan-Imran Khan unite against Macron
  The Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan & Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan are making personal attacks & publicly humiliating French President Emmanuel Macron.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYZsctFLBBE

Thereafter that was followed by the killing of a French teacher who used the cartoons of Muhammad to teach about Freedom of Speech. Then it was followed by more killings of Christians in churches [nothing to do with the cartoons] in France.

What followed was much silence from the Islamic leaders with many giving indirect support to the Islamic terrorist.
Then we have the Islamic leaders who directly condoned the killings; e.g.

• Ex-Malaysia PM: Muslims have right to ‘kill millions of French people’ | New York Post
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8hovw5sgpI
  
  Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad on Thursday said Muslims have the right “to be angry and to kill millions of French people for the massacres of the past”.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znzvjLQBY6I

I believe we must trace the problem of such evil within the minds of the above leaders and individual Muslims to the psychology within their brain.

Therefore whenever we come across responses and individual Muslims condoning the killing of non-Muslims, the first thing we must focus is there is something wrong within their brain, i.e. the psychological issue.
One point is that religious psychological issue is within the majority to the extent the majority cannot sense the problem is within themselves on an individual basis.

Throughout history religious zeal of believers had led to genocides and killing of non-believers.
Such killings are driven mostly by the evil nature of the believers themselves and not commanded by the doctrines themselves.
The ONLY religion where its doctrines directly command believers to kill and harm non-believers is Islam with its heavily loaded evil laden elements in its doctrine.

My point:
Whenever there are evil and violence acts committed by religious believers we must trace it to the following;
1. whether the doctrine of that religion is intrinsically evil and violent
2. the religious related psychological problems of the individual[s].

Views?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Nov 11, 2020 7:42 am However I would like to dig deeper and attribute the points with more focus to every individual on the individual basis rather than the collective.

Religions are collective by their nature. There is no individual religion. It's organized, stratified, unified and often regimented. Individually, persons may have spiritual yearnings and insights, but these don't translate to action.

More often when the issues and problems are blamed on the groups, the critical root causes that are relevant are diffused and disappeared into the group and nothing is done thereafter.

Too bad. It's a group phenomenon, and nothing can be done about it anyway, because the group defence-mechanism is far more dangerous than secularists can combat.

I believe we must trace the problem of such evil within the minds of the above leaders and individual Muslims to the psychology within their brain.

Muslims, Christians, Jews.... yeah. That collective energy is powerful. Evil men use, harness, direct, and feed off any source of power. The top dogs in a jihad or crusade are not the least bit interested in, or persuaded by, their god. They couldn't care less about religion - any more than the jingoists who pretend they want to Make [insert name of floundering state] Great Again give a flying fig about their country or its people. What they need is the adulation, the unquestioning loyalty of idiot masses who will rush off to kill and die for those "leaders".

Therefore whenever we come across responses and individual Muslims condoning the killing of non-Muslims, the first thing we must focus is there is something wrong within their brain, i.e. the psychological issue.

Of course. All humans are more or less crazy.

TBC

One point is that religious psychological issue is within the majority to the extent the majority cannot sense the problem is within themselves on an individual basis.

Of course. We have only a vague and incomplete understanding of our own brain. A few neuro-specialists know a great deal about how it works, but not how the contents of thought, experience, instinct, memory, emotion and stimuli will manifest in any given individual in any given situation. All they can do is estimate and predict macro responses based on statistical data.

Throughout history religious zeal of believers had led to genocides and killing of non-believers.

And the gods rejoiced and the demagogues prospered. So?

Such killings are driven mostly by the evil nature of the believers themselves and not commanded by the doctrines themselves.

Sure. That's a given. Scripture always needs interpreting for someone's benefit.

The ONLY religion where its doctrines directly command believers to kill and harm non-believers is Islam with its heavily loaded evil laden elements in its doctrine.

NOT SO. Muhammad derived his religion from the Judeo-Christian tradition. The biblical OT is chock full of genocides expressly ordered by Jehovah. M. hoped to make peace with the people of The Book, but the Christian empire could not tolerate this upstart rival and responded with 9 merciless crusades (plus three damp squibs that hurt more Europeans than Arabs). Followed, a couple of centuries later, by genocidal forays into Asia and the Americas, which were very successful indeed. Not to mention a slave trade and extensive oppression, starvation, impoverishment, degradation and abuse of occupied peoples, looting of their treasures and pollution of their lands.

Whenever there are evil and violence acts committed by religious believers we must trace it to the following;
1. whether the doctrine of that religion is intrinsically evil and violent
2. the religious related psychological problems of the individual[s].

And then what?
1. They don't think their violence is evil.
2.They're not willing to change their behaviour or their belief.
3. There are more of them than of you.

Skip wrote: ↑Wed Nov 11, 2020 5:11 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Nov 11, 2020 7:42 am However I would like to dig deeper and attribute the points with more focus to every individual on the individual basis rather than the collective.

Religions are collective by their nature. There is no individual religion. It's organized, stratified, unified and often regimented. Individually, persons may have spiritual yearnings and insights, but these don't translate to action.

I agree religions are by default organized in groups and institutions grounded on a specific constitution.
What I meant is the need to focus in the individuals that make up the group, the organization or institution.

I believe there are very desperate psychological forces that drive an individual into a religion and the believer is therefrom influenced into actions by the doctrines and commands of from the constitution of the religion.

For example a genuine Muslim is one who is psychological desperate for salvation to gain eternal life in paradise [hopes of virgins] which Allah promised him if he complied with all the commands of Allah in the Quran. In the Quran, Allah in Quran 5:33 commanded Muslims to kill and harm non-Muslims upon the slightest threat to the religion.
If the genuine Muslim to be assured to eternal life in paradise he has to comply with Quran 5:33 else he would be sent to hell.
This is how believers of religions are driven into actions [in this case evil acts] by the religion.

More often when the issues and problems are blamed on the groups, the critical root causes that are relevant are diffused and disappeared into the group and nothing is done thereafter.

Too bad. It's a group phenomenon, and nothing can be done about it anyway, because the group defence-mechanism is far more dangerous than secularists can combat.

All groups comprised on individuals.
Thus to do something to the group one need to address the individuals and progress to achieve a critical mass to change the ideology of the group or eliminate the group.

I believe we must trace the problem of such evil within the minds of the above leaders and individual Muslims to the psychology within their brain.

Muslims, Christians, Jews.... yeah. That collective energy is powerful. Evil men use, harness, direct, and feed off any source of power. The top dogs in a jihad or crusade are not the least bit interested in, or persuaded by, their god. They couldn't care less about religion - any more than the jingoists who pretend they want to Make [insert name of floundering state] Great Again give a flying fig about their country or its people. What they need is the adulation, the unquestioning loyalty of idiot masses who will rush off to kill and die for those "leaders".

I agree when believers [or other humans] "swarm" or be a mob, the collective energy is very powerful for either good or evil.

Wherever there are terrible evil and violence in perpetrated by religious believers we must trace the root causes as follows;

• 1. There are good and evil religious believers
  
  2. There are religions with overriding pacifist doctrines and evil doctrines.

The constitution and doctrines Christians [Gospel only], Buddhists, Jains, Hindu-Vedanta are govern by an overriding pacifist maxim of no evil against non-believers.
As such where there are terrible evil and violent acts by Buddhists [e.g. Myanmar], Christians [crusades, etc.] these evil acts are committed by evil religious believers as driven by their own inherent evil nature. In this case we cannot blame the religion for the faults of its evil believers.

On the other hand, the constitution and doctrines of Islam is loaded with evil-laden elements as commanded by Allah.
Whilst the good Muslims will exercise restraints, the evil-prone Muslims will take upon the evil laden commands as their religious duty and obligation in order to gain the merit of eternal life.

Therefore whenever we come across responses and individual Muslims condoning the killing of non-Muslims, the first thing we must focus is there is something wrong within their brain, i.e. the psychological issue.

Of course. All humans are more or less crazy.
TBC

DNA-RNA wise ALL humans are 'programmed' with the inherent potential to commit act which can be construed as evil in certain circumstances.
But only a percentage [20% conservatively] of ALL human are born with an active tendency
to commit evil/bad acts of various degrees in a continuum. [1]
Thus it is critical we need to recognize the above facts.

DNA-wise ALL humans are also "programmed" with an existential crisis that exudes terrible psychological forces. [2]

The most effective solution [balm] to soothe the existential crisis is religions where most believers will cling to like there is no tomorrow.
Islam is the only religion that has evil commands embedded in its doctrines and constitution. [3]

When [1], [2] and [3] merge what we get is this;



To resolve the above, the critical focus in on the individual believers and their brain, then review whether the doctrine of the religions is laden with evil elements or not.

Skip wrote: ↑Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:38 pm

One point is that religious psychological issue is within the majority to the extent the majority cannot sense the problem is within themselves on an individual basis.

Of course. We have only a vague and incomplete understanding of our own brain. A few neuro-specialists know a great deal about how it works, but not how the contents of thought, experience, instinct, memory, emotion and stimuli will manifest in any given individual in any given situation. All they can do is estimate and predict macro responses based on statistical data.

I am optimistic humanity will be able to dig much deeper into the human brain and how it works with greater precision in the future, given we are already on an progressive trend of an exponential expansion of knowledge and technology. Are you familiar with the Human Genome Project and the Human Connectome Project [to map the whole human brain to human actions].

Meantime we have loads of research that support the high correlation between the exposure of evil/violent material to the vulnerables and their resultant evil actions in the long term and short term basis.
This is why we have PG ratings and censorship of evil and violent materials in movies, computer games, media, etc.

Based on such correlations it is obvious the evil and violent materials in the Quran as commanded by a God will definitely influenced the 20% of evil prone Muslims [note that is a pool of 300 million!! ] to commit terrible evil and violent acts upon non-Muslims as their religious duty to do so.

Throughout history religious zeal of believers had led to genocides and killing of non-believers.

And the gods rejoiced and the demagogues prospered. So?

My point is, whenever there are evil and violent acts by religious believers, our attention must be directed to the desperate psychology within their brains, then we review whether they are motivated directly by their religious doctrines and duty.
Point is, the authorities never do that but rather blamed indirect and secondary factors such as politics, poverty, suppression, culture, etc.

Such killings are driven mostly by the evil nature of the believers themselves and not commanded by the doctrines themselves.

Sure. That's a given. Scripture always needs interpreting for someone's benefit.

The scripture of the religion is only to be blamed if it explicitly condone and permit believers to commit 'evil' [good and a duty to believers] acts.

The ONLY religion where its doctrines directly command believers to kill and harm non-believers is Islam with its heavily loaded evil laden elements in its doctrine.

NOT SO. Muhammad derived his religion from the Judeo-Christian tradition. The biblical OT is chock full of genocides expressly ordered by Jehovah. M. hoped to make peace with the people of The Book, but the Christian empire could not tolerate this upstart rival and responded with 9 merciless crusades (plus three damp squibs that hurt more Europeans than Arabs). Followed, a couple of centuries later, by genocidal forays into Asia and the Americas, which were very successful indeed. Not to mention a slave trade and extensive oppression, starvation, impoverishment, degradation and abuse of occupied peoples, looting of their treasures and pollution of their lands.

Having done extensive research into Islam [full time for many years] I consider myself a reason expert on the Quran -the core of Islam.
>33% of the verses of the 6236 verses in the Quran are related to the Biblical Judeo-Christian tradition.
However >34% of the 6236 verses contain evil laden elements [of various degrees] that are directed to non-Muslim [the kafir, infidels], including the permit for Muslims to kill non-Muslims upon the slightest threat to the religion, note the killings, even because of cartoons.

Christianity is solely grounded on the Gospels, the OT and others are merely supporting texts. The Gospels has an overriding pacifist maxim, i.e. love all -even enemies.
I can guess those Christians who joined the crusades then would have been reprimanded by Jesus and God at the gates with;
... "WTF, I never commanded you to kill non-believers and you went on a killing spree, you will be sent to hell for a period"
Thereafter they are likely to be forgiven subsequently since they killed for the greater good in response to atrocities and capture of the holy land initiated by Muslims.

Whenever there are evil and violence acts committed by religious believers we must trace it to the following;
1. whether the doctrine of that religion is intrinsically evil and violent
2. the religious related psychological problems of the individual[s].

And then what?
1. They don't think their violence is evil.
2.They're not willing to change their behaviour or their belief.
3. There are more of them than of you.

As I had stated all religions has their specific constitution, e.g. the Quran in Islam, the Gospels for Christianity, etc.

There are various contentious verses in the various holy texts but what matter are the overriding doctrines and principles therein.

It is very explicit within the Gospels, the overriding pacifist maxim is 'love all -even enemies' which is very plain. There is nothing contentious with such a maxim.

It is also very explicit within the Quran, there is the overriding command Quran 5:33 that command and permit Muslims to kill and harm non-Muslims upon the slightest threats to the religion of Islam.

Whatever is stated in the constitution and doctrines must be complied with by all believers. If they don't comply then they will not be rewarded with the eternal life in paradise that is promised to them.

It is thus critical humanity must reveal what is true of each religion - the good, the bad and the evil.
I agree, in the present psychological state, the majority will not change their religion even if it is proven to be false or evil.

But the general principle is "the truth will always prevail" and with persistent exposures of the falsehoods and evil of religions, believers* will gradually shift their thoughts and beliefs in the future [not now].
* in addition, humanity must strive towards the future to explore and implement FOOL PROOF strategies to deal with the inherent unavoidable psychological forces of each individual.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 5:26 am I agree religions are by default organized in groups and institutions grounded on a specific constitution.
What I meant is the need to focus in the individuals that make up the group, the organization or institution.

In order to do that, you have to isolate a specific individual and study him or her for a long enough time to understand their formative environment, life experience, current requirements and thought processes. It would take quite a long time to devote such scrutiny to each of +/-5 billion people. Failing that, you're making generalizations about a hypothetical "individual" from statistical data based largely on group behaviour. IOW - talking through your hat.

I believe there are very desperate psychological forces that drive an individual into a religion

Not at all! The vast majority of people who identify with a religion were born into it and never learned any alternative world view until adolescence or adulthood - and many cases, never. Only a small minority of religionists arrived at their current faith through voluntary conversion - and quite a few of those did so for the sake of a worldly love object, not for the god. Some youthful converts to Islam or nazism do it like joining a gang: for the thrill and fraternity - not for the god. Some convert to Christianity for pragmatic reasons: for better access to opportunities - not for the god.
None of those are desperate situations; it's just normal life in civilized societies.

their and the believer is therefrom influenced into actions by the doctrines and commands of from the constitution of the religion.

Not very much. Most people conduct themselves exactly as they would under any other religious umbrella: Honest people deal honestly; aggressive people push others around; the kind ones do charity; the greedy ones cheat the gullible; the smart ones teach; the mean ones do other people down. There is no appreciable difference in the Bell curve of Muslim, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu and Judaic populations. Most people, most of the time, abide by the rules that suit them, obey the ones they can't evade and ignore the rest.

For example a genuine Muslim is one who is psychological desperate for salvation....

What makes you think so? What's a non-genuine Muslim? Can you tell them apart at the supermarket checkout?

All groups comprised on individuals.

And all individuals are formed by their group.

Thus to do something to the group one need to address the individuals and progress to achieve a critical mass to change the ideology of the group or eliminate the group.

What are you proposing to do?

I agree when believers [or other humans] "swarm" or be a mob,

You can agree with it, but that's not what i said.

the collective energy is very powerful for either good or evil.

What does that mean? How is a collective 'energy' powerful for good or evil? Who gets to say which actions are good and which are evil?

Wherever there are terrible evil and violence in perpetrated by religious believers we must trace the root causes

I don't feel compelled by that "we" or impelled by that "must".

Skip wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:00 pm Most people conduct themselves exactly as they would under any other religious umbrella: Honest people deal honestly; aggressive people push others around; the kind ones do charity; the greedy ones cheat the gullible; the smart ones teach; the mean ones do other people down. There is no appreciable difference in the Bell curve of Muslim, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu and Judaic populations. Most people, most of the time, abide by the rules that suit them, obey the ones they can't evade and ignore the rest.

I think this is a good description which can also apply to any belief system (religious, political, family, societal, etc.), and all systems have the capability of manufacturing diverse results (for better or worse) and being distorted.

For the most part, the people within those systems (very likely) do what it is in their nature to do. People may be inspired to be a better version of themselves, or they may be compelled to act out their rage, or feed their ego... all because they think it is "right" or justified to do so.

So... the system doesn't override the individual... and the individual doesn't represent the system. We should beware when we forget/ignore this, because we could be playing into yet another system.

The environment - political, cultural, religious, economic and societal conditions - always constrain the individuals within them to exhibit certain natural behaviours and refrain form other natural behaviours, but no sustainable environment can make people behave unnaturally. Conversely, no system that attempts to force unnatural behaviour on people can sustain itself. It's relatively easy to suppress or purge the small minority that falls outside the normal range; all the rest will be pandered to, accommodated, required to make only manageable alterations to their overt persona, bearably discommoded.

In particular: we all have some degree of natural aggression, usually on a scale of meek passivity to homicidal mania, with females generally dominating the lower two-thirds of the scale, males dominating the upper two thirds. It's not difficult, then, for a society to decree that men will be the soldiers and navvies, cops and bosses, while women will be the handmaidens, child-minders, care-givers and practitioners of the social graces. Throw in harsh punishments for infraction, support the family unit and provide some pleasant diversions, and you can keep that system going for quite a long time. Centuries, even. Just so long as the three pillars are stable: Governance (rulership, legislation and administration), Commerce (economy; property; production and distribution) and Guidance (constitution, world view; philosophical basis of interactions). It doesn't matter about the brand or colour of those pillars, just so they are clearly defined and fit together. When any of those falter, the whole structure is in trouble.

It's no good blaming Muslims for their turmoil: most of their nations have been torn up and trashed in the past century. The religion and some cultural traditions is all that they've been able to save of their old collective identities - and even those are in question. It's going to take a big change in the global dynamics, and a very long time, for all those castaways to find permanent homes in stable societies - if there even is such a thing anymore....

Perhaps it doesn't go without saying that it's no good trying to "fix" the psychology of individual believers, if there is no secure identity for them to assume or accepting community in which to live. Just as there is no point in removing a malfunctioning kidney, if you can't follow up with a transplant and post-operative home care.

Skip wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:00 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 5:26 am I agree religions are by default organized in groups and institutions grounded on a specific constitution.
What I meant is the need to focus in the individuals that make up the group, the organization or institution.

In order to do that, you have to isolate a specific individual and study him or her for a long enough time to understand their formative environment, life experience, current requirements and thought processes. It would take quite a long time to devote such scrutiny to each of +/-5 billion people. Failing that, you're making generalizations about a hypothetical "individual" from statistical data based largely on group behaviour. IOW - talking through your hat.

I never meant to address and isolate a specific individual for study and scrutinize each of the +/-5 billion people in my post.

My point was referring to understanding the psychological forces that drive a person to be religious and why SOME tend towards evil and violence.
This is typical of psychological research where the focus on the human being in general and not isolating specific individual and studying each of the 7 billion people on Earth.

I believe there are very desperate psychological forces that drive an individual into a religion

Not at all! The vast majority of people who identify with a religion were born into it and never learned any alternative world view until adolescence or adulthood - and many cases, never. Only a small minority of religionists arrived at their current faith through voluntary conversion - and quite a few of those did so for the sake of a worldly love object, not for the god. Some youthful converts to Islam or nazism do it like joining a gang: for the thrill and fraternity - not for the god. Some convert to Christianity for pragmatic reasons: for better access to opportunities - not for the god.
None of those are desperate situations; it's just normal life in civilized societies.

I agree the majority of people are born into a religion.
Some become very religious - the born again and some are indifferent to the religion they are born into. Some convert into other religions for various reasons, but these are the minority of the +/-6 billions who are naturally religious and +/-5 billion who are theistic.

However, DNA-RNA wise the majority of people are inherently religious, so the majority gravitate toward the religion they are born into naturally in various degrees of religiosity.

DNA-RNA wise, ALL humans are 'infected' with desperate psychological forces which drove the majority into religions.
It is these desperate psychological forces that we need to give attention to when addressing evil and violent acts by SOME religious believers who are evil prone.

their and the believer is therefrom influenced into actions by the doctrines and commands of from the constitution of the religion.

Not very much. Most people conduct themselves exactly as they would under any other religious umbrella: Honest people deal honestly; aggressive people push others around; the kind ones do charity; the greedy ones cheat the gullible; the smart ones teach; the mean ones do other people down. There is no appreciable difference in the Bell curve of Muslim, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu and Judaic populations. Most people, most of the time, abide by the rules that suit them, obey the ones they can't evade and ignore the rest.

The issues with religions and believers is the negatives they had brought forth and what is worrying are the ones that will be repeated in the future.

Yes, there is no difference in the Bell Curves of human variables within Muslim, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu and Judaic and other religious populations.
What is critical here is the 20% [very conservative] of evil prone believers within the populations.
Both the Islamic and Judaic doctrines contain loads of evil and violent elements.
It is no evident the evil elements in the Quran had influenced SOME of the 20% of evil prone Muslims to commit terrible evil and violence throughout its 1400 years history and note the recent evil and violence in this stats [subject to refinements];



Surely humanity cannot be indifferent to the above [in addition to other types of evils and violence]?

It is because of the above that we need to understand the desperate psychological forces within a religious believers and the truths of the doctrines of each religion.

For example a genuine Muslim is one who is psychological desperate for salvation....

What makes you think so? What's a non-genuine Muslim? Can you tell them apart at the supermarket checkout?

This is a general statement which is reflected in the point that people are born into a religion.
A genuine Muslim is one who has psychologically aligned with the doctrines of Islam and has entered into a contract [covenant] with Allah.

All groups comprised on individuals.

And all individuals are formed by their group.

Your above not make sense.

Thus to do something to the group one need to address the individuals and progress to achieve a critical mass to change the ideology of the group or eliminate the group.

What are you proposing to do?

What I propose is we need to initiate actions immediately but should only expect reasonable results in the future only if effective actions are carried out.
As I had proposed,
1. We need to get to the truths of the doctrine of Islam [or any other religion] and exposed the evil and violent elements that are influencing SOME of its evil prone believers to commit terrible evil and violent acts upon non-Muslims.
2. More research should be done to understand the desperate psychology within any religious believers.

I agree when believers [or other humans] "swarm" or be a mob,

You can agree with it, but that's not what i said.

the collective energy is very powerful for either good or evil.

What does that mean? How is a collective 'energy' powerful for good or evil? Who gets to say which actions are good and which are evil?

First we need to define what is evil.
'Evil' acts are those that has a net-negative impact on the well being of the individual and humanity.
Would you dispute genocides is evil and we can index it a standard bearer of evil with an index of say 100/100. We can then assess other types of evil based on this index and prepare a taxonomy of evil acts.

Wherever there are terrible evil and violence in perpetrated by religious believers we must trace the root causes

I don't feel compelled by that "we" or impelled by that "must".

To each his/her own.

My point is any concerned-citizen of humanity should contribute within one's competence to prevent evil and violence acts of any sort, in this case religious driven evil and violence with emphasis of Islamic-driven evil due the evident stats we have.

Skip wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 10:31 pm ..
It's no good blaming Muslims for their turmoil: most of their nations have been torn up and trashed in the past century. The religion and some cultural traditions is all that they've been able to save of their old collective identities - and even those are in question. It's going to take a big change in the global dynamics, and a very long time, for all those castaways to find permanent homes in stable societies - if there even is such a thing anymore....

I believe it is ineffective to blame Muslims because they are not the proximate root causes.
I had even stated we should not blame the terrorists [albeit must be accountable] who are in a way victims and were compelled by the commands of their religions.

Do Not Blame Muslims!
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24842

For Islamic based evil and violent acts, the focus must be on the evil laden ideology of Islam.
The Islamic God who has power over the Muslim's stake of either eternal life or eternal hell, commands Muslim to kill and harm non-Muslims upon the slightest threats to the religion. Note the case of even cartoons that triggered the killings of non-Muslims.
Theoretically and logically, if there is no Islam, there will be no Islamic-based evil and violent acts. Of course, it is a different issue in practice, but nevertheless that is the logical point to understand the root cause of Islamic driven evil and violent acts.

If there are no Muslims, the natural % of evil prone people will still commit evil but that would be a secular issue that must also be addressed.

Skip wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 10:55 pm Perhaps it doesn't go without saying that it's no good trying to "fix" the psychology of individual believers, if there is no secure identity for them to assume or accepting community in which to live. Just as there is no point in removing a malfunctioning kidney, if you can't follow up with a transplant and post-operative home care.

I mentioned above, in fixing the psychology of individual believers, there must be FOOL PROOF [in caps] alternatives to deal with the inherent unavoidable desperate psychology within the individual.
As such the change need to be gradual, not within a generation, but over a few generations.

Note,
10,000 years ago, a slave who was trapped in slavery would not be able to do anything but could only dream and wish slavery is abolished immediately then.
On hindsight, DNA-RNA wise ALL humans are born with the neural potential to be free agent but then in 10,000 years ago, such a potential was still in its dormancy within the majority.

But now after 10,000 years, humanity has reached a commendable stage where chattel slavery is illegal in all sovereign nations. This could only be achieved upon a change in the psychological state of the majority in contrast to the majority then 10,000 years ago.

The above is evident that the psychological state of individuals can change for the better, albeit the change in attitude towards chattel-slavery took that long.
Therefore for the better of humanity, there is the possibility of changing the psychological state of religious believers and its associated evil and violence in the future.
However there is a need to expedite the process and this is possible in the near future [50-100 years] given the current trend of the exponential expansion of knowledge and technology.

However you are indifferent, do not seem to be optimistic and put up resistances all the way for the betterment of humanity in the future.

If humanity has a future, it doesn't depend on pseudo-science.
Religion is not evil in and of itself: it's a tool for controlling people.
As long as there are too many people and they're insecure, there will be demagogues to take advantage of their anxiety, to offer an them an alternate reality with which they're more comfortable than facing the real world and their own insignificance.
People cannot be vaccinated against delusion. They either outgrow their childhood fantasies, or they're eaten by the monsters under the bed.
If your basic premise is flawed, whatever elaborate theories you build on it will crumble.