THE CARTESIAN REVOLUTION--THE LANGUAGE OF MATHEMATICS

While Galileo confined himself to the study of mathematical and astronomical phenomena, his contemporary, René Descartes (1596-1650), a French philosopher and mathematician, began to describe in clear-cut terms the full outline of the new universe discovered by the rationalists. When still a young man, Descartes became deeply dissatisfied with the scholasticism that still survived in the teachings of the Jesuits from whom he received his early training. A Catholic who never quarreled with the official custodians of religious tradition, he was determined to gain knowledge only from himself and from nature and the observation of man.

René Descartes is called the father of modern philosophy. He initiated the movement generally termed rationalism, and his book, "Discourse on Method and Meditations," defined the basic problems of philosophy for at least a century.

To appreciate the novelty of the thought of René Descartes, one must understand what modern philosophy, or rationalism, means in contrast to medieval, or scholastic, philosophy. The great European thinkers of the 9th to 14th century were not incapable of logical reasoning, but they differed in philosophic interests and aims from the rationalists. The moderns, from Descartes on, usually identified philosophy with the natural and pure sciences; the medievals, however, made little distinction between philosophical and theological concerns.

The medieval doctors, like St. Thomas Aquinas, wanted to demonstrate that the revelations of faith and the dictates of reason were not incompatible. Their universe was that outlined by Aristotle in his Physics - a universe in which everything was ordered and classified according to the end that it served. During the Renaissance, however, men began exploring scientific alternatives to Aristotle's hierarchical universe. Further, new instruments, especially Galileo's telescope, added precision to scientific generalizations.

By the beginning of the 17th century the medieval tradition had lost its creative impetus. But the schoolmen, so called because they dominated the European universities, continued to adhere dogmatically to the traditional philosophy because of its association with Catholic theology. The rationalists, however, persistently refused professorships in order to preserve their intellectual integrity or to avoid persecution. They rejected the medieval practice of composing commentaries on standard works in favor of writing original, usually anonymous, treatises on topics suggested by their own scientific or speculative interests. Thus the contrast is between a declining tradition of professorial disputes over trivialities and a new philosophy inspired by original, scientific research.

Descartes participated in this conflict between the scholastic and rationalist approaches. He established a new, clear way of thinking about philosophy and science by rejecting all ideas based on assumptions or emotional beliefs and accepting only those ideas which could be proved by or systematically deduced from direct observation. Descartes made major contributions to modern mathematics, especially in developing the Cartesian coordinate system and advancing the theory of equations.

In recognizing that mathematics constituted the fundamental basis of physical science, Descartes laid the groundwork for that exactness of observation and calculation that was to become the outstanding characteristic of modern science. His work is considered of such importance that it is generally recognized by the term, the Cartesian Revolution. The old Aristotelian idea that nature consists of a variety of unrelated objects, each seeking to fulfill its aim in its own way, was now superseded by the Cartesian principle that nothing in nature is accidental or arbitrary, but that everything is governed by universal mathematical laws. Cartesianism became the official beacon of the new science, even if its explanations were as yet a little too simple and not always proved by experimentation. Most important of all, it effectively prepared the way for the great synthesis of Newton, who has been called the greatest of the Cartesians.

FROM THE DARK AGES TO THE AGE OF REASON--FRANCIS BACON

During the Age of Reasoning, among the proponents of the new inductive, experimental method, Francis Bacon (1561-1626) was the most influential. Bacon wanted to revolutionize philosophy by turning its material from speculative metaphysics to experimental science. In three remarkable books, one of which was Novum Organum, he astutely attacked the deductive method of scholasticism and with great eloquence described the direction of the new scientific methodology. In doing so, he repudiated the traditional, religious authority in favor of experimentation. He warned that the man of science must center his interest on the laboratory not the cathedral. In setting forth the widening intellectual breach separating the people of his day from the Dark Ages, he helped formulate a new conception of the universe and contributed much to the triumph of the mechanical interpretation of nature by the Western Civilization.

Francis Bacon is considered the father of modern scientific method. Basically, the scientific method includes the principles and empirical processes of discovery and demonstration considered characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation, generally involving the observation of phenomena, the formulation of a hypothesis concerning the phenomena, experimentation to demonstrate the truth or falseness of the hypothesis, and a conclusion that validates or modifies the hypothesis.

In his book, Novum Organum, he warned that four Idola, or obstacles to clear-thinking, idols of the Tribe, Den, Market, and Theatre, had to be removed in order to insure against error in the collection of facts. After exposing obstacles to accurate thinking, Bacon went on to suggest ways of overcoming them. He rejected traditional dogmas and individual prejudices, directed the thought of Europeans to the study of the particular, and shifted the emphasis from arguments to facts. Experience, he said, is the only medium through which we may know things. The new science was strongly influenced by Bacon’s classical formula: “Man, who is the servant and interpreter of nature, can act and understand no further than he has observed, either in operation or in contemplation, of the method and order of nature.”

Specifically, the Four Idols, which Bacon said were preventing people from thinking more accurately, actually were flaws and fallacies of the human mind. These are flaws that each human being has to overcome in order to think scientifically.

The four idols distinguished by Francis Bacon are erroneous images of things:

1.   Idols of the Tribe—general tendencies to be deceived, inherent in our nature as human beings

2.   Idols of the Cave—distortions arising from our particular perspectives

3.   Idols of the Marketplace—errors that come in the course of communication with others: misunderstandings arising through misuses or abuses of words

4.   Idols of the Theater—errors of introducing ideas, theories, and imaginative notions as facts

As you read Bacon’s explanation for the human tendencies to think inaccurately, it may help to think of “Idols” as meaning false notions.

1.   “The Idols of the Tribe have their foundation in human nature itself, and in the tribe or race of men. For it is a false assertion that the sense of man is the measure of things. On the contrary, all perceptions as well of the senses as of the mind are according to the measure of the individual and not according to the measure of the universe. And the human understanding is like a false mirror, which, receiving rays irregularly distorts and discolors the nature of things by mingling its own nature with it.” –Novum Organum, Aphorism XLI

In other words, the senses are flawed in that they are capable of illusions; and, the mind is capable of delusions.

2.   “The Idols of the Cave are the idols of the individual man. For everyone (besides the errors common to human nature in general) has a cave or den of his own, which refracts and discolors the light of nature, owing either to his own proper and peculiar nature; or to his education and conversation with others; or to the reading of books, and the authority of those whom he esteems and admires; or to the differences of impressions, accordingly as they take place in a mind preoccupied or predisposed or in a mind indifferent and settled; or the like. So that the spirit of man (according as it is meted out to different individuals) is in fact a thing variable and full of perturbation, and governed as it were by chance. Whence it was well observed by Heraclitus that men look for sciences in their own lesser worlds, and not in the greater or common world.” –Novum Organum, Aphorism XLII

The mind itself may cause its own distortions called delusions. People are predisposed to thinking that opinions and imaginings profoundly stated and faithfully believed by the masses are somehow true. And, some of us not only have blind faith but are also blinded by our faith.

3.   “But the Idols of the Market Place are the most troublesome of all—idols which have crept into the understanding through the alliances of words and names. For men believe that their reason governs words; but it is also true that words react on the understanding; and this it is that has rendered philosophy and the sciences sophistical and inactive. Now words, being commonly framed and applied according to the capacity of the vulgar, follow those lines of division which are most obvious to the vulgar understanding. And whenever an understanding of greater acuteness or a more diligent observation would alter those lines to suit the true divisions of nature, words stand in the way and resist the change. Whence it comes to pass that the high and formal discussions of learned men end oftentimes in disputes about words and names; with which (according to the use and wisdom of the mathematicians), it would be more prudent to begin, and so by means of definitions reduce them to order. Yet even definitions cannot cure this evil in dealing with natural and material things, since the definitions themselves consist of words, and those words beget others. So that it is necessary to recur to individual instances, and those in due series and order, as I shall say presently when I come to the method and scheme for the formation of notions and axioms.”  --Novum Organum, Aphorism LIX

According to Bacon, there are two basic kinds of Idols of the Market Place:

“They are either names of things which do not exist (for as there are things left unnamed through lack of observation, so likewise are there names which result from fantastic suppositions and to which nothing in reality corresponds), or they are names of things which exist, but yet confused and ill-defined, and hastily and irregularly derived from realities.”  --Novum Organum, Aphorism LX

Bacon said that the Idols of the Market Place were given this name by him because "on account of the commerce and consort of men there. For it is by discourse that men associate, and words are imposed according to the apprehension of the vulgar [deficient in refinement]. And therefore the ill and unfit choice of words wonderfully obstructs the understanding. Nor do the definitions or explanations wherewith in some things learned men are wont to guard and defend themselves, by any means set the matter right. But words plainly force and overrule the understanding, and throw all into confusion, and lead men away into numberless empty controversies and idle fancies."

4.   Idols of the Theater are “Idols which have immigrated into men’s minds from the various dogmas of philosophies [religions, myths, superstitions], and also from wrong laws of demonstration. These I call Idols of the Theater because in my judgment all the received systems are but so many stage plays, representing worlds of their own creation after an unreal and scenic fashion. Nor is it only of the systems now in vogue, or only of the ancient sects and philosophies, that I speak; for many more plays of the same kind may yet be composed and in like artificial manner set forth; seeing that errors the most widely different have nevertheless causes for the most part alike. Neither again do I mean this only of entire systems, but also of many [false] principles and [false] axioms in science, which by tradition, credulity, and negligence have come to be received. --Novum Organum, Aphorism XLIV

Concerning the number Bacon says furthermore: “Idols of the Theater, or of Systems, are many, and there can be and perhaps will be yet many more. For were it not that now for many ages men’s minds have been busied with religion and theology; and were it not that civil governments, especially monarchies, have been averse to such novelties, even in matters speculative; so that men labor therein to the peril and harming of their fortunes—not only unrewarded, but exposed also to contempt and envy—doubtless there would have arisen many other philosophical [and religious] sects like those which in great variety flourished once among the Greeks. For as on the phenomena of the heavens many hypotheses may be constructed so likewise (and more also) many various dogmas may be set up; and established on the phenomena of philosophy [religion, mythology, superstition, etc.]. And in the plays of this philosophical [imaginary] theater you may observe the same thing which is found in the theater of the poets, that stories invented for the stage are more compact and elegant, and more as one would wish them to be, than true stories out of history. –Novum Organum, Aphorism LXII

FROM THE DARK AGES TO THE AGE OF REASON--COPERNICUS & GALILEO

Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543) was a Renaissance astronomer and the first person to formulate a comprehensive heliocentric cosmology which displaced the Earth from the center of the universe. Copernicus' epochal book, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres), published just before his death in 1543, is often regarded as the starting point of modern astronomy and the defining epiphany that began the scientific revolution. His heliocentric model, with the Sun at the center of the universe, demonstrated that the observed motions of celestial objects can be explained without putting Earth at rest in the center of the universe. His work stimulated further scientific investigations, becoming a landmark in the history of science that is often referred to as the Copernican Revolution.

He was born into a well-to-do family, and after his father died in 1483 he was put under the guardianship of his uncle, a bishop of Warmia (Poland). He went to university in Krakow and spent a decade in Italy, studying law and mathematics. A canon of the cathedral at Frombork, Copernicus carried out administrative duties and, from his house, observed the stars and planets. For years he worked on his theory that the planets in our solar system revolved around the sun (Ptolemy of ancient Greece had explained that the universe was a closed system revolving around the earth, and the Catholic church concurred). Hesitant to publish his work for fear of being charged with heresy (which was punishable with death), Copernicus summarized it in 1530 and circulated it among Europe's scholars, where it was greeted with enthusiasm. His work was finally published in 1543, apparently just a few weeks before he died.

Because Copernicus' heliocentric theory of the planets defied 1,500 years of tradition, some historians mark the publication date of De revolutionibus as the beginning of the "scientific revolution."... It wasn't until 1835 that his work was taken off the list of books banned by the Vatican. Galileo Galilei was another scientist who got in trouble for believing that the earth moved around the sun.

Mathematics as the only key to unshakable knowledge was the paramount discovery of the sixteenth century, but it remained for an Italian mathematician, astronomer and experimental physicist, Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), to give it practical and convincing application. He played a major role in the Scientific Revolution—so much so that he has been called the “father of modern observational astronomy,” the “father of modern physics,” the father of science,” and the “Father of Modern Science.” His achievements include improvements to the telescope and consequent astronomical observations, and support for Copernicanism.

Stephen Hawking says, "Galileo, perhaps more than any other single person, was responsible for the birth of modern science." The motion of uniformly accelerated objects, taught in nearly all high school and introductory college physics courses, was studied by Galileo as the subject of kinematics. His contributions to observational astronomy include the telescopic confirmation of the phases of Venus, the discovery of the four largest satellites of Jupiter (named the Galilean moons in his honor), and the observation and analysis of sunspots. Galileo also worked in applied science and technology, inventing an improved military compass and other instruments.

Galileo's championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime, when a large majority of philosophers and astronomers still subscribed to the geocentric view that the Earth is at the centre of the universe. After 1610, when he began publicly supporting the heliocentric view, which placed the Sun at the centre of the universe, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615. In February 1616, although he had been cleared of any offence, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture", and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", forced to recant, and to spend the rest of his life under house arrest.

MAKING THE MOST OF YOURSELF

All people have a variety of talents, skills, abilities, and aptitudes. They use their talents in many ways. Some people use a very large percentage of their abilities. Others use only a few skills, even though they realize that they have other talents which could be developed. And finally, some people have abilities of which they are unaware. Most people have a few talents they have worked on, some undeveloped talents, and many undiscovered talents.

Abraham Maslow, a humanistic psychologist, suggests that many people are not able to fully use their talents because they must spend most of their time and energy meeting their lower needs. He says that all people have five basic needs. These are physical needs, safety needs, love needs, esteem needs, and self-actualization needs. To this list, I add self-fulfillment needs.

PHYSICAL NEEDS:  Physical needs are simply those which your body must have in order to work properly. Your body needs food, water, sleep, exercise, and protection from illness. It needs to eliminate wastes and to be sheltered from the weather. If any of these needs are not met, nothing else seems important.

SAFETY NEEDS:  People not only have the need to be free from harm but they also have a need to feel as though they will continue to be safe and secure. For example, you need to feel safe from crime, from violence, or from being punished or hurt because of something you did. When your safety needs are met, you feel protected and comfortable. When you do not feel safe, you are likely to worry about what you can do to make your life more secure.

LOVE NEEDS:  Another need which all people have is the need for love, affection, and belonging. Although each of us may seek to satisfy these needs in various ways, we all have the need to belong to someone or some group.

ESTEEM NEEDS:  The need for esteem (or to be valued for who or what you are) is the need to feel important and worthwhile. You need to feel respected and appreciated by both yourself and others; by receiving approval or esteem from others, you come to feel more self-respect and more self-esteem.

Thus, a person’s self-concept is directly related to the need for esteem. The more you feel important and worthwhile, the more positive is your self-concept. People who have their esteem needs met are more likely to accept themselves.

Even though most people try to be like the in-crowd, the good and bad experiences which each person has had result in a unique self. Whether a person truly develops his unique potential as an individual (which is the only way to achieve self-fulfillment) or strives to be “like everyone else,” or makes no sincere effort to improve is largely a matter of choice. However, one can sacrifice oneself in order to achieve “success,” but, no matter how much “success” one achieves in this way, such behavior does not actualize oneself and does not lead to self-fulfillment. Of course, some people try to turn themselves on and off as the games they play in their lives change. Such behavior may indeed fool others, but it also fools one’s own subconscious mind, and the side-effect of such self-deception is to sacrifice self-fulfillment. You can, of course, turn your conscious mind on and off, but your subconscious mind is always recording; and, to pretend to be someone that you are not confuses your subconscious mind and may cause your true self to cease to exist.

What you think about yourself is your self-concept. Your ideas about your worth as a person, your strengths and weaknesses, and your special abilities are all part of your self-concept. Some people have positive self-concepts while others have negative ones. Jim, for example, sees himself as a capable, competent person. Because he has shown himself to be a thoughtful and responsible person, everyone seems to respect him and compliments him highly. Rick, on the other hand, lacks self-confidence in his ability to handle his life. His irresponsibility has hurt not only himself but also significant others who have trusted him. As a result, he has a negative self-concept.

A person’s self-concept is formed by interactions within his or her environment with other people. Usually, the family has the most influence on the development of the self. The quality and type of experiences that a person has in the family determine self-concept to a relatively large extent; however, others in one’s culture and one’s physical environment can significantly affect his or her self-concept. For instance, racial prejudice and discrimination based upon race has collectively affected many Black Americans in a negative way. After having growing up under such circumstances, by the time a person gets old enough to think for oneself, he or she has probably developed a negative self-concept. What is makes matters worse is that a negative self-concept in-and-of itself may cause a person to behave in negative ways towards both self and others.

SELF-ACTUALIZATION NEED:  Self-actualization is the need people have to become themselves in ways that maximizes their potential to be the best that they can be and to do the best that they can do to become their best true selves. Thus, to self-actualize is to self-improve by studying, learning, practicing, and rediscovering yourself in ways that increase your potential for self-fulfillment. This actually means persistently becoming the person that your true self calls you to be or to become. Usually, however, this includes making worthwhile contributions to humanity.

SELF-FULFILLMENT:  Although everyone has a need for self-fulfillment, relatively few people seem to achieve it. The major reason why more people do not is because all of the other needs must be relatively satisfied before one can successfully achieve this need. In short, self-fulfillment comes to a person after he or she has relatively satisfied all of his or her lower basic needs and then feels as though his or her life has been worthwhile not only for self but also for others—that is, one must also feel as though one’s life has been beneficial to humanity.

EXISTENTIALISM (Notes from the lectures of Professor Robert Solomon)

Professor Solomon calls existentialism a “no-excuses” philosophy because one of its main themes is that in order for an individual to take control of his or her own life, he or she must take responsibility for his or her choices as well as the consequences that those choices cause.

John Paul Sartre captured the essences of existentialism when he said: “I have never ceased to believe that one is and one makes oneself of whatever is made of one.” The idea is that we make ourselves.

Professor Solomon presents a lecture about the following three existentialist themes:

1.   Individuality:  Soren Kierkegaard defined himself as an individual. We are all unique. For Sartre, however, individuality is basically individual choice. With choices the individual takes responsibility for making his or her own choices and takes responsibility for the consequences of those choices.

 

2.   Passion:  Passion is very powerful and very important for human life. According to Kierkegaard, to really be oneself one must passionately commit oneself to a way of life that actualizes oneself.

 

Note that he was not talking about the outward expression of emotions; he was talking about the passion of commitment to developing oneself in a way that is compatible with one’s uniqueness and individuality.

The really passionate person is not necessarily the one that expresses a lot of emotion or talks a lot; the passionate person is quite inwardly contained and is self-defined by his or her passions—not by what others say think or do.

For the existentialist, to ideally exist is to live passionately. The writings of Friedrich Nietzsche encourage us to live according to our passions. In a philosophical sense, however, passion is the power of self-control; and, it is used to improve oneself, to persistently and consistently self-actualize towards self-fulfillment.

 

3.   Freedom:  None of us are detached from nature or our social environment; therefore, these are not the freedoms that were meant. What existentialists mean by freedom is personal freedom—how we think of ourselves, how we behave, and how we think about our behavior.

 

Kierkegaard said, “People hardly make use of the freedoms they do have—like the freedom of thought; instead, they demand the freedom of speech as compensation.”

The idea is that freedom has to do with making choices. It has to do with deciding how you are going to live your life. Freedom also means taking responsibility for the consequences of the choices that we make.

Freedom is also connected to reason—to be free is to think and act rationally.

Reason, however, should serve the passions. Passions motivate us. Without passion, there is no motivation. It is passion that gives meaning to life; without passion, life is meaningless. Therefore, your primary passions should determine what your life really means to you.

 

So, perhaps the best way to think of your life is in terms of your passions. This doesn’t mean stupid passion or unrestrained emotions. It means passion with a worthwhile purpose.

 

Because we have the ability to reason and because we are affected by our thoughts, it is through passionate commitment that we give our lives particular meanings.

RELIGION IS LIKE MEDICINE--REASONS WHY SOME NEED IT--AND, SOME NEGATIVE SIDE-EFFECTS

Like medicine, religion has its goodness as well as its harmful side-effects. Generally speaking, a major goodness is that most religions are designed to keep its adherents from self-destructing; this is good because life can be so complicated and difficult to understand that some people wouldn’t even want to live if it were not for their religion. To “save” such people, their religion tells them what to think and what to do; and, it psychologically punishes them for not doing as they have been told. On the other hand, a very debilitating side-effect is that the person gives up his or her individuality as well as the human right to think for himself or herself; in doing so, such a person stunts his or her psychological growth in regards to self-awareness, self-enhancement, self-actualization, and self-fulfillment. Despite holding a person back from achieving his or her full potential, religions convince such a person to believe that he or she is happy.

Following are ten reasons for having and maintaining faith in religion. However, you are not totally indoctrinated by (or hypnotized by) some religion, you may be able to think of some other reasons why people are religious. On the other hand, if you are thoroughly indoctrinated by (or hypnotized by) a religion, then you will think that I mistakenly omitted your “real” reason—the one that you were taught to believe.

1.   Childhood Rearing:  It is very difficult to be taught something from birth and then deny that it is true even in adulthood—especially when most people in ones environment are persistently reinforcing such beliefs. Religions have built-in ways to perpetuate its beliefs; note this verse from the Ephesians 6:4 of the Bible: “Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.” In fact, some religions conspire to keep people in a childlike submissive state of mind; for example, In the Deuteronomy 14:1, adherents are told: “You are the children of the LORD….” Note that this scripture wasn’t merely written for children—it was written for adults too. Also, some religions are emotionalized with fear, and thus becoming more sustainable; for example, fear is taught in the Bible—witness this by reading the following quote from Psalm 34:11, “Come, my children, listen to me; I will teach you the fear of the LORD.” The following statement from Proverbs 22:6 reveals why childhood indoctrination into religion is the main reason why so many people are religious: “Start children off on the way they should go, and even when they are old they will not turn from it.”

2.   Fear:  The fear of death is an emotionally powerful motivation for people to not only become religious but also to not question their religion. A lot of people are not only afraid of dying but are also afraid of what might happen to them after they die. Thus, when taught that those who don’t believe what their religion teaches and don’t do exactly what they are told will infinitely burn in hell after they die, this fear not only motivates them to believe but also motivates them to get as many others as they can to also believe.

3.   Desperation and Need:  It is much easier to have faith in a religion when you have nothing else. If you are in a time of desperation and need with no hope, then you need something on which to hold. “If someone is completely satisfied with life then they have no need for a religion because they are content with how they are.”

4.   Tradition:  A lot of people just accept their religion because it is their tradition. It is ingrained in the mainstream of their culture and has been practiced all of their lives by most people around them. Like the saying goes: “If it was good enough for my father, mother, grandparents, and great-grandparents, then it’s good enough for me.” Or, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” Thus, if you were born and raised in Europe or America, then your religion is most likely to be Christianity; however, if you were born and raised in India, your religion would most likely be Hinduism; still, if you were born and raised in China, your religion would most likely be Taoism, Buddhism, or Confucianism; etc. People in all religions tend to believe that their religion alone holds the absolute truth, yet if they were simply born into another culture or with parents that had a different belief their religion would most likely be different too.

5.   Searching Reasons to Live:  For most people who are not born into wealth, living is a hard struggle to survive and to succeed. Even those who have the inherited advantage of wealth, they too have to find reasons to live that are greater than simple pleasures. All religions provide motivation to live; and, some, however, provide motives for following their rules that include rewards after life.

6.   Guilt and Shame:  Growing up is a process of trial and error. Therefore, all people have made some bad choices in their lifetime; so, it is normal for people to feel guilt and shame. Some religions promise a new start (“to be born again”), which will include the forgiveness of all of one’s past wrong-doings (or sins).

7.   A Better Social Life:  Human beings tend to be social animals. What other people think matters to most people. Most of us also have needs to feel loved and to feel as though we belong to someone or some group or some valued social organization. Thus, to belong to a religious organization tends to extend people’s self-concepts and causes them to feel better about themselves; they also get a hefty dose of instant love whenever they congregate with other socially needy persons of the same faith. This not only feels great, but if people in the religious organization help each other, then that in-and-of itself can be greatly rewarding.

8.   Contentment and Assurance:  Even as complicated as life essentially is, if people faithfully believe that all they have to do to be saved is “X, Y, Z” the best that they can and if somehow they falter, all they have to do is repent and ask for forgiveness, such simplistic belief is very comforting and reassuring. It is also much less stressful than thinking for one’s self, trying to figure out the best way to not only survive but also to become quite successful in a worthwhile livelihood that is not only self-actualizing but also leads to self-fulfillment.

9.   Reliance upon Others:  A lot of religious people do not want to take responsibility for their actions, their choices, and the world that they create around themselves. They need someone to blame and someone to send their problems to, so they blame “Satan” and send their problems to “God” in prayer. If they believe that the “world” is essentially bad and that all people are born in sin, then (when they sin) they can blame the Devil, repent, ask God (and sometimes other members) for forgiveness, then forget about it; after that ritual, then they don’t have to be concerned about the consequences of their sins because God will take care of everything; they also feel that the extent to which they have to modify their behavior is to strengthen their religious conviction and adherence to its doctrines. Many people have said that they can't do something on their own so they leave it in God's hands. For example, some have said, "I can't quit smoking on my own, I can't quit drinking on my own, I can't live a happy life on my own, I can't find a good job on my own or live a satisfied fulfilling life on my own so I just put my faith in God knowing that he will do all these things for me." Of course, this kind of attitude may prevent stress and strain that may occur with self-reliance, but it tends to prevent self-growth, self-enhancement, self-actualization, and the greatest being of all—self-fulfillment.

10.             Spiritual Fulfillment:  Here, I define “spirit” simply as thought and/or emotion. There is a spiritual void in thoughts and/or emotions of some people that they themselves do not know how to fill without their religion. Basically, they want a life with more meaning and more purpose. I think that this is one of the biggest reasons why people turn to a religion hoping that they can satisfy that spiritual void. You go to church and you see all of these people excited for God and you think to yourself, "this must be it; this is what I have been searching for; just look how happy all these people are." So you join the church and you get excited and on fire for God and you’re so happy and nothing can ever take you down. But as time goes on you start to realize that the spiritual void is still there and you start feeling the same as you did before if not worse. That is perhaps the main reason that so many religious people are overweight—that is, they think that they are always suppose to be happy; and, since food makes them happy, they try to fill that void with food; this constant craving for happiness and overeating to reduce it tends to cause obesity.

Conclusion:  Religions may have some very important benefits for some people; however, they may also cause some negative side-effects for those who fully submit to them.