Serious question, and her are two options for us to consider. There may be others of course.

1) it’s about what you believe in your “heart” (sic) (mind)

2) it’s about how your beliefs impact your behaviour

@divegeester said
Serious question, and her are two options for us to consider. There may be others of course.

1) it’s about what you believe in your “heart” (sic) (mind)

2) it’s about how your beliefs impact your behaviour

4. Religion is the opium of the masses (acts like a narcotic, easing the pain of the poor and oppressed in a "heartless world." ) - Karl Marx

@ghost-of-a-duke said
4. Religion is the opium of the masses (acts like a narcotic, easing the pain of the poor and oppressed in a "heartless world." ) - Karl Marx

5. Social cohesion. If as you grow up everyone around you is a Christian (for example) you'll likely be one yourself; the herd instinct is a strong one. This only works, mind you, on a 'micro - level', where religious beliefs are contained within a society in isolation, as was largely once the case. Once one religious belief encounters another, social disintegration tends to be the order of the day...

@moonbus said
It's not about belief. It's about coping with eschatological issues, practically.

@fmf said
It is about beliefs in so far as holding them helps someone to cope with eschatological issues.

@moonbus said
The belief is incidental, the coping is primary.

@moonbus said
Only someone who worships words would think religion is about beliefs.

@fmf said
The belief is instrumental in the coping.

@fmf said
Religion is about the beliefs upon which aspirations are founded.

@moonbus said
I think maybe we should distinguish "bad religion" from "religion when it is doing what it ought to be doing." Bad religion is a placebo for shell-shock victims of a "heartless" world they don't understand; religion when it is doing what it ought to be doing helps people cope with such a world. Some people, anyway. Others manage to cope without it.

@moonbus said
No, it’s the social aspect (indoctrination, conditioning) which is instrumental. In Greek pagan and native Celtic religions of pre-Christian Europe, and Aruba (Africa), for example, there were no beliefs/doctrines or sacred writings involved, just communal rituals. It didn’t matter what people believed, or even if they believed nothing, so long as they engaged in the rituals. The religions of the book are peculiar in this regard.

@moonbus said
Only in the religions of the book and even then only for those who worship words. Not in every religion. This can be seen by distinguishing heresy from blasphemy. Blasphemy is doing something at odds with the will of God or the gods; heresy is believing something at odds with Church doctrine. Pagans knew what blasphemy was (doing something wrong); only Christians have a conce ...[text shortened]... is peculiar to Christianity), it's about coping (with or without belief) with eschatological issues.

@moonbus said
At the risk of propagating a "grandiose generality" I'm sticking to my statement that it's not about belief (which is peculiar to Christianity), it's about coping (with or without belief) with eschatological issues.