Religions make a Big Problem out of life's little problems

We've all got problems.

Some days it seems like life is nothing but one problem popping up after another. Car won't start. Forgot to pay credit card bill. Child came home with bad report card. Faucet has started leaking. Knee is hurting for some reason.

Of course, much of life is problem-free.

Or seemingly so. Even when things are going well, usually there's some nagging glitch that keeps an enjoyable experience from being perfectly so. I'm enjoying the movie, but, geez, why does that guy behind me have to eat his popcorn so noisily?

There's no problem in getting help with our problems. Family, friends, doctors, plumbers, You Tube, Google -- fortunately there are plenty of places to turn when we aren't sure how to handle a problem. 

However, now that I'm in a churchless frame of mind I do have a problem with religions that manufacture an overarching Big Problem. This isn't any of life's little problems, though supposedly it is the hidden cause of them. For example...

Christianity has Original Sin. Hinduism has Maya. Buddhism has Karma. 

These supernatural Big Problem concepts are used to explain why everyday life is so full of little problems. Religions also promise that if we can fix the Big Problem, those little problems will go away. Maybe not now, but after death.

Then we'll be saved, enlightened, released from the wheel of rebirth, or whatever other goodie is promised by some religion.

Only problem is, there's no evidence that the Big Problem exists, nor any evidence that after death all of our little problems will vanish and we'll still be alive in some form.

(For sure our problems will vanish after death, but without holding some religious belief the best bet is that so will we; no me, no problems -- yet also no me aware of having no problems.)

So here's something to ponder:

Given that we already have to deal with so many problems in life, does it make sense to embrace a religion that conjures up a Big Problem which we're supposed to deal with along with everyday little problems?

Or is it possible to live a meaningful life without believing in some hypothesized Big Problem that only exists as theological dogma, not direct experience?

Not surprisingly, I answer "no" and "yes" to those questions.

Comments

[Tom]

My God Brian, you guys are so *literal*! I forget what it must be like to live amongst so many fundamentalists.

However, even without religious torment, we in Europe do still occasionally have to account for 'big problems'. Things like stress, depression, 'working through our issues', hating our jobs, despising our politicians, our bankers...

When psychologists tell us our own secondary (psychosomatic) stress far outweighs the primary stress factors, it's hard not to conclude there might actually be a flaw somewhere in human nature.

Not that such a flaw need defeat us, just that it can't be disposed of simply by jettisoning some mythology. (But a bit of buddhist meditation helps, apparently.)

[cc]

It makes sense if there is a Big Problem, so The Question of whether it's real or imagined must be answered.

[Sandra]

Whats's about this idea:
Our problems are too small, so we are tending to create a big problem embracing e religious believe like original sin, karma-wheel, ecc.

I am observing that people who don't have real profound problems, they tend to invent some for themselves.
I really think people like to have problems. So they have something to do, their lives are not empty any more. They have something really important to do: solve their (invented) problems.

[Tom]

It makes sense if there is a Big Problem, so The Question of whether it's real or imagined must be answered.

Yes, the reality of it may be that we are run by imagination.

If myth is not allowed ultimate significance, new stories will cut in to run the show. It's been going on a long time.

[cc]

"I am observing that people who don't have real profound problems, they tend to invent some for themselves."

The mind exists to solve problems, how ever gross or subtle, practical or poetic, so when it isn't pursuing something, it's observing, seeking food for thought.

Shen the mind has no real problems like finding water or food or safety, and it isn't playing games, it applies itself to philosophical questions, and having no inclination to go the distance, accepts platitudes, cliches, and religious dogma as resolution.

[cc]

"If myth is not allowed ultimate significance, new stories will cut in to run the show. It's been going on a long time."

Whether the myth is old or new, it rules, so the question is whether the myth is up to date or old hat, and whether the new hat is really an improvement on the old one.

[Tom]

Whether the myth is old or new, it rules, so the question is whether the myth is up to date or old hat, and whether the new hat is really an improvement on the old one.

Whichever hat I have I don't want it glued to my head.

So my problem with these vastly improved new hats is the belief that they can never be removed.

That's the 'same old' that noone seems to notice.

[cc]

So my problem with these vastly improved new hats is the belief that they can never be removed.

Are you not attached to a hat? Do you change hats everyday to suit new circumstances, new information? Living is adapting, but we tend to identify rather than modify, so invariably you're known by your hat.

[Tom]

Are you not attached to a hat?

If you're saying there's often one on my head - sure. But that's not what I mean by attachment. Attachment is when it rains and a particular one becomes welded to my skull.

In another thread we're talking about authority figures, and the error of relying on external authority. That can be extended to knowledge and inner authority - not that you shouldn't think and reason, but don't promote the products of thought into your guru.

The objection I'm laying on modern myth making is that it demonizes the old authority whilst regularly sneaking in its own. Science is the new salvation, so to speak - not because it sets itself up that way but because our dependence on authority is ingrained, so we set ourselves up. We then become Parrots and Bastards, to use UG's terms.

Just as stories don't require total belief, knowledge doesn't have ultimate authority. That's what makes the hat(s) removable.