From a secular point of view, which kind of society is better in the utilitarian sense for the longest amount of time...

From a secular point of view, which kind of society is better in the utilitarian sense for the longest amount of time? One based in religion, or one generally skeptical of it?

Attached: jeuse.jpg (829x768, 73K)

>secular point of view
>asks about religion
the wew on this stupid person.

It's possible to approach a question like this objectively without putting your own personal religion into it. Clearly a religious person would automatically think a religious society would succeed and an atheist would automatically think a secular one would. I'm trying to see what people think based on the pure outcomes.

>is dogma sustainable

no just no.

religion Is generally for unintelligent people. It's a tool of social control by those in power on the retarded masses

you cannot ask about religion and secularism in the same sentence as the secular means "without religion".

>religion Is generally for unintelligent people
found the npc.

It was badly worded. What I meant to convey was just without any leaning one way or another. Agnostic would be the closest way to put that, but even that has implications.
So to re-word my post,
"From a utilitarian perspective, is religion good for a society in the long term?"

Or rather "is organized religion good for a society" since it's really the social structure itself I'm interested in

an educated ruling class that approaches life with a deist or stoic morality. for the lower classes simplified religion.

It's completely irrelevant. Ideology doesn't matter, religion doesn't matter, political leanings don't matter, only race and genetics does.
A 100% white nation is always going to outperform a 100% non-white nation. Even if both of these nations adhered to the same religion, or no religion at all, those ideas would be expressed differently.
If all whites convert to judeism, they wouldn't all become greedy kikes because it's not in their genes, too altruistic. If all whites converted to islam they wouldn't turn into backwards savages, too nice. If all whites converted to Buddhism, they wouldn't go into monasteries and mediate for 18 hours a day, it's too much of a waste of time for a race addicted to dopamine and constant struggle.

Religion is bullshit and there's no magic sky man controlling everything. But religion is necessary because the vast majority of people are too stupid to have morals without it. They need the fear of going to hell to keep them from being their worst selves. It works. Atheism should be limited to the handful of people who came up with it themselves because they have the logic ability to call out religion's BS. When atheism takes hold of a large varied group, you get degeneracy, because without the fear of God they have no reason not to be a bunch of disgusting selfish cunts.

Only complete idiots think this.
Anyone who has actually interacted with common workers, generally stupid people and even homeless knows that the average person is too busy with their own shit to think about some thousand year old religions from foreign places.
Their morality doesn't come from religion, they don't even think about religion, what they think about is how to get their next paycheck, how to raise their kids etc.
Their ''morality'' comes from their genes. All they are doing is what millions of years of evolutionary selection tells them is the best way to survive and pass on their genes. People will act according to their genetics no matter where they are, no matter what they're told and no matter what religion they follow.

Animals aren't religious. Therefore humans or, more probably, a distant precursor to humans must have evolved religion along the way to it being a ubiquitous feature of the human experience (animals have a capacity for ritual even at the level of geese for instance, but religion goes beyond this substantially). The implication is that religion was at minimum not a hindrance to survival and replication, and in all likelihood provided significant benefit.

But there is a further implication. Everything we evolved biologically, socially, and culturally beyond the historical adoption of religion as a human trait is built upon and functions in the context of an organism that is religious, much like our organs function with the aid of specific enzymes and proteins we likely evolved before becoming more complex. In short, we're stuck with it. The trick is using religion for something useful with our intelligence. It's baked in.

either 17 and mad at your dad or a total fucking retard... i cant figure it out though

>atheism is muh special club cuz i iz smart and founded it
>no grills allowed

Socrates was poisoned you know

Which ever doesn't mock it's maker...

It isn't really about fear of Hell. It's about hope for Heaven. Nothing kills spirituality and creates degeneracy like living a happy and fulfilling life without real troubles and conflicts. Religion always fades to irrelevancy if too many people prosper.

Religiosity is correlated with happiness and is evolutionary advantageous. So I guess a religious society.

At the same time countries ranked as happiest are also among the most secular.

the teutonic knights state was one of the most succesfull states of its time, it was a theocracy with monks as leaders