Russia, China and religion

[☆ pantheory ☆]

Unlike China who adopted Communism and Atheism as the state dogma, Russia when becoming communists and declaring atheism as the state dogma, the populous did not follow. In Russia religion still remained practiced in private. Upon conversion to a semi-capitalist system (semi-dictatorship) religion is now more widely practiced, the dominant religion being Christianity and the Russian Orthodox church. 

 

Russia today, although 2/3 rds Christian, allows a variety of religions, churches and Temples, and primarily Slavic and oriental Russians (eastern Russians) are up to 1/4 Non-religious or atheists.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Russia

 

China, still under communism, also officially now allows religion to be practiced in their country. About 1/3 are Buddhists, more than half have religious beliefs of some kind, about 1/4 are non-believers, agnostics,  or atheists. About 2.5 % are Christians, and about 1.5 % Moslem. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_China

 

So religion is dominant amongst western countries as well as Communist countries and the lesser educated peoples of the world, and will probably remain so for maybe a century or more in the future.  IMO. What is your opinion?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

1 hour ago, pantheory said:

Russia when becoming communists and declaring atheism as the state dogma, the populous did not follow. In Russia religion still remained practiced in private. Upon conversion to a semi-capitalist system (semi-dictatorship) religion is now more widely practiced,

 

Maybe a 'bread and circuses' approach? 

A small concession for a big advantage, imo. Especially when taken in global context. It's a time tested and effective means of controlling the masses. And it's cheap. 

1 hour ago, pantheory said:

China, still under communism, also officially now allows religion to be practiced in their country. About 1/3 are Buddhists, more than half have religious beliefs of some kind, about 1/4 are non-believers, agnostics,  and atheists. About 2.5 % are Christians, and about 1.5 % Moslem. 

Same thing, imo. 

 

1 hour ago, pantheory said:

So religion is dominant amongst western cultures as well as Communist countries and the lesser educated peoples of the world, and will probably remain so for maybe a century or more in the future.

Why only a century or more? Doesn't seem like people are going to give up their quests for God any time soon to me. 

[☆ pantheory ☆]

1 hour ago, moxieflux66 said:

 

Maybe a 'bread and circuses' approach? 

A small concession for a big advantage, imo. Especially when taken in global context. It's a time tested and effective means of controlling the masses. And it's cheap. 

Same thing, imo. 

 

Why only a century or more? Doesn't seem like people are going to give up their quests for God any time soon to me. 

 

A century or more, is similar to the meaning  "not anytime soon." right?

[AnonSan]

16 hours ago, pantheory said:

China, still under communism, also officially now allows religion to be practiced in their country. About 1/3 are Buddhists, more than half have religious beliefs of some kind, about 1/4 are non-believers, agnostics,  or atheists. About 2.5 % are Christians, and about 1.5 % Moslem. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_China

 

So religion is dominant amongst western countries as well as Communist countries and the lesser educated peoples of the world, and will probably remain so for maybe a century or more in the future.  IMO. What is your opinion?

 

The Christian population in China may be estimated to be higher, between 7-9% of the total population (Pew Research, 2023). It's hard to get an accurate census of the Christian population in China because of authoritative opposition towards Western influence for many decades, particularly the during the Boxer Rebellion and the Chinese Revolution outcome in 1949 (persecuted Christian members like my grandparents and my church of origin's founder fled to Taiwan). While the modern era gained significant presence of Christianity in China, the largest Christian institutions in China there are highly regulated and restricted by the CCP. All other blacklisted, denominational groups remain underground as "house churches," so they do not get recorded in their official demographic reports. Also, how the CCP counts their Christian population is also highly regulated as they can be only counted if they are baptized and registered to any CCP-approved church orgs. The rough estimate listed is provided by independent research and missionaries outside of the CCP radar. 

 

My understanding of Christianity in China is that such denominations there, whether regulated or blacklisted by the CCP, continues to have greater presence in the country as long as these institutions know how to enmesh principles of Christianity into Chinese culture. Example being Confucianism in relation to Biblical teachings that double down on collectivist, traditional family roles (patriarchal hierarchy). They pick and choose whatever Biblical and Western principles suit their collectivist culture and advantage in enforcing politically-charged policies.  The CCP does welcome Western influences, including Christianity, as long as they benefit their society and (socio-)economic power, but of course will take time and heavy moderation on their end.

[Crithin8]

On 10/8/2024 at 6:37 PM, pantheory said:

So religion is dominant amongst western countries as well as Communist countries and the lesser educated peoples of the world, and will probably remain so for maybe a century or more in the future.  IMO. What is your opinion?

My question is in the absence of organized religion is there a substitute behavior that people default to? In my thinking if religious thinking and behavior could be patterned does that pattern exist without religion? And if so what evolutionary adaptation did it come from and historic purposes did it serve. 

 

As far as the lesser educated as I heard the late Daniel Kahneman say in an interview,  who identified the mental shortcuts that hijack the thought processes, he was still susceptible to them. 
 

I do not think religion will stop happening, on majority levels, before deep evolutionary time has passed

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

On 10/8/2024 at 6:41 PM, pantheory said:

 

A century or more, is similar to the meaning  "not anytime soon." right?

Ok, ya got me there! 

 

16 hours ago, Crithin8 said:

My question is in the absence of organized religion is there a substitute behavior that people default to? In my thinking if religious thinking and behavior could be patterned does that pattern exist without religion? And if so what evolutionary adaptation did it come from and historic purposes did it serve. 

Philosophy and ethics? 

 

16 hours ago, Crithin8 said:

I do not think religion will stop happening, on majority levels, before deep evolutionary time has passed

Agreed. 

[☆ pantheory ☆]

17 hours ago, Crithin8 said:

My question is in the absence of organized religion is there a substitute behavior that people default to? In my thinking if religious thinking and behavior could be patterned does that pattern exist without religion? And if so what evolutionary adaptation did it come from and historic purposes did it serve. 

 

As far as the lesser educated as I heard the late Daniel Kahneman say in an interview,  who identified the mental shortcuts that hijack the thought processes, he was still susceptible to them. 
 

I do not think religion will stop happening, on majority levels, before deep evolutionary time has passed

 

IMO when you grow up with religious morals from you parents and the society that surrounds you, some of that will rub off. I am a scientific atheist, I no longer have an open mind about God or religion, But I grew up as a Christian and most of my morals now are the same or better than when I was a Christian. I was somewhat of a fan of fornication then, now I'm a big fan of it. I never was a big fan of being with another man's wife, and I still don't like it -- not that I have offers at my age. Would I if I could? Maybe the same answer as when I was 25,. I did not look forward to it but it would not be impossible. I never did Covet, so there never was a problem there.

 

I'm better at my own moral code now than when I was a Christian, "Don't do unto others as you would not want them to do unto you." I never was much for swearing, steeling, killing, etc. But I had a pretty easy life growing up, and religion was not forced upon me, although all my family were Christians and still are, but my folks have since passed on.

 

So, I think nearly all humans are influenced by their surrounding humans and the society where they live, and if it's care for your fellow man/woman it's a part of one's personal moral code too, right? cheers

[Crithin8]

1 hour ago, moxieflux66 said:

Philosophy and ethics? 

The stubborn “I know I’m right! kind? Lol. I’m throwing darts in the dark at some bulls eye of phycology I think. Something that evolved from primitive group survival instincts. 

 

3 minutes ago, pantheory said:

 

IMO when you grow up with religious morals from you parents and the society that surrounds you, some of that will rub off. I am a scientific atheist, I no longer have an open mind about God or religion, But I grew up as a Christian and most of my morals now are the same or better than when I was a Christian. I was somewhat of a fan of fornication then, now I'm a big fan of it. I never was a big fan of being with another man's wife, and I still don't like it -- not that I have offers at my age. Would I if I could? Maybe the same answer as when I was 25,. I did not look forward to it but it would not be impossible. I never did Covet, so there never was a problem there.

 

I'm better at my own moral code now than when I was a Christian, "Don't do unto others as you would not want them to do unto you." I never was much for swearing, steeling, killing, etc. But I had a pretty easy life growing up, and religion was not forced upon me, although all my family were Christians and still are, but my folks have since passed on.

 

So, I think nearly all humans are influenced by their surrounding humans and the society where they live, and if it's care for your fellow man/woman it's a part of one's personal moral code too, right? cheers

I agree on morals passed down from religious experiences. I also feel that religious morals come from trial and error within and borrowed ideas from outside the religion. I wish I didn’t covet. Every time I best it someone around me buys something new…

[Dsred19]

Religion itself changes morals all the time. The church used to think divorce was evil, now it is just as common, if not more than, the secular population. Sec before marriage happens all the time and people know it and pastors marry them anyway. Women used to be relegated to dresses and modesty, and although there are some sects that still hold to that, it is much less common now. Proves to me morals are relative even with religion. They change with the culture.

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

6 hours ago, pantheory said:

I was somewhat of a fan of fornication then, now I'm a big fan of it.

 

Me too! 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

On 10/9/2024 at 7:33 PM, Crithin8 said:

My question is in the absence of organized religion is there a substitute behavior that people default to? In my thinking if religious thinking and behavior could be patterned does that pattern exist without religion? And if so what evolutionary adaptation did it come from and historic purposes did it serve. 

 

As far as the lesser educated as I heard the late Daniel Kahneman say in an interview,  who identified the mental shortcuts that hijack the thought processes, he was still susceptible to them. 
 

I do not think religion will stop happening, on majority levels, before deep evolutionary time has passed

 

You make some very good points.  Having studied the social and behavioral sciences, here is my take on the big picture of moral evolution.  We are social animals and need a sense of community. Something to bond us together. Something to help us feel like we belong and are worthwhile.  When our "communities" get so large that we don't have some personal contact with most in the community, and especially if people from other backgrounds enter our communities with different values and behaviors, problems arise.  Then some kind of agreed upon ideology is needed to bond people together and provide a sense of community.  Religion has done that, (some by force) but if they are rigid, and believe their way is the only way, division occurs and tribalism develops, sometimes resulting in wars.  We need an ideology that huge societies, and the world, can agree upon to maintain a sense of community, peace and cooperation.  I believe the "love (respect) thy neighbor as thyself" is the best ideology I have heard of that would accomplish a sense of world community.  That implies that we love/respect ourselves, and others as we do ourselves.  We need to think in terms of WE.  Not ME.  But ego and the love of money (power/control) does not like that kind of thinking.  

 

The advent of democracy was a positive step in evolutionary moral development, but we are struggling to even hold onto that at this point in history.  Our moral evolution has a long way to go!!  Education for the wellbeing of human beings is sorely needed, but education for that has been cut down by the powers that be for ages, and continues to this day. They only want education for promoting monetary profits for their industry, and keeping them in control.   If Jesus really existed, his push for humanitarian ideology got him killed.  Powerful people and radical right wing thinkers have always done their best to maintain their power positions, and they profit from division and wars.  If everyone loved themselves and respected others, their profits would plunge.  Only a priority of human wellbeing over power and profit will advance humane, moral evolution.  And that takes EDUCATION for rational, critical thinking and looking at the long term big picture of life on earth.  It takes politicians who are concerned about the wellbeing of humanity, Not just winning in the next election.  It takes everyone being concerned about more than "keeping up with the Joneses", and how to get the next thrill. 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

On 10/10/2024 at 1:21 PM, pantheory said:

I was somewhat of a fan of fornication then, now I'm a big fan of it.

I hope that is accompanied with protection from disease and unwanted pregnancy!

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

8 hours ago, Weezer said:

I hope that is accompanied with protection from disease and unwanted pregnancy!

Are you implying pantheory is a floozy? 

[☆ pantheory ☆]

12 hours ago, Weezer said:

I hope that is accompanied with protection from disease and unwanted pregnancy!

 

Yes, of course Weez. Protection is vital for both partners. Unwanted pregnancies, none that I know of for many many decades.

 

As to STD's, luckily never had any, and therefore never could pass any on.