True! But we have to remain open to the possibility that any such belief could represent a local maximum, roughly analogous to Ptolemaic astronomy or Newtonian physics: Serviceable in limited contexts but falling apart in others.
> western secular humanism seems like an “ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of” Christianity.
Which half of Christianity would that be?
Being serious now: Christianity — the version actually preached by Y'shua of Nazareth — is simply Judaism stripped down to two specific commandments from the Hebrew Bible: Love God, love your neighbor as yourself. See the Parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37 ("Do this and you will live [eternally]") [0] and its counterpart in Matt. 22:34-40 ("On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets"). [1] Jesus wasn't trying to start a new religion: He wanted Jews to be better Jews, and he seems only reluctantly to have concerned himself with non-Jews.
What we now think of as "Christianity" and its doctrines of the Triune God, soteriology (how "salvation" is achieved), and christology (what was the nature of Jesus): Those came later — in some cases, much later — from others, not from Jesus himself, so far as we know.
[0] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2010%3A25-...
[1] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matt.+22%3A34-4...
So we will essentially be defacto empowering many of the views that you may consider undesirable. It really makes one rethink the relevance and place of sustainability. It seems that on any timescale that matters, it must be considered the most fundamentally critical value of any culture. Because in some ways society really is a sort of expanding zero-sum game. When one group declines, another group defacto rises.
It's really annoying that there seems to be little to nothing in the way of a compromise between indulgent excesses driving the death of procreation on one end, and 'trust nothing but the Book' driving successful procreation on the other. There needs be some sort of a cultural medium.
Yeah, in exponential processes, the exact value of the base matters exponentially.
[0]: https://bookshop.org/p/books/why-we-need-religion-stephen-t-...
She doesn't preach or judge but I can see how faith anchors her. It gives her answers and an unyielding optimism in the face of difficulty, and I can tell you as someone who has clawed her way through a poverty most people in this world will only ever read about, she has known what difficulty can be. Faith keeps her positive and kind and generous. She finds it in herself to let go of anger and to forgive thanks to her belief in God.
So you're bang on the mark - my personal observations agree that religion helps us process emotions.
Seen through the lens of a social technology, we've replaced religion with consumerism and individualism, and social media has encouraged unchecked mammon. And so we're having to relearn everything old as new again.
Confession and grace are parts of the toolkit in therapy. Breathing techniques from yoga, wim hof and meditation are doing the rounds. The presence of song and chanting in many religions seems like a decent overlap...
Then at times of the highest reported rates of loneliness, especially amongst the young, what did religion give us - a local community.
Don't get me wrong, there was a lot of bad with religion but modern faith in places like the UK or the Nordics seems to be a net benefit IMO...
Even in light of what the Christian Nationalist movement is striving towards in the US, and in light of the ugly persistence of fundamentalism in places like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan?
Obviously an overly simplistic thought experiment, yet I wonder if we have any way, that isn't arbitrary, to say if a tool is net beneficial.
Side note...I've often played with the idea in the past of what I called the case for moral superposition: nothing is good or bad, everything is good AND bad, but thinking makes it good OR bad.
"I feel annoyed that this person is doing this thing. But if I say something, they may feel angry, so I won't say something... And then will fight against myself instead."
Any religion which is not a cause of love and unity is no religion.