Religions are constructs created by humans, often serving as frameworks through which individuals seek understanding and meaning in their lives. However, many argue that these belief systems provide a false sense of comfort or hope, distracting people from confronting the harsh realities of existence. In this view, the allure of religion can prevent individuals from recognizing that, in the grand scheme, nothing truly matters. This detachment from reality can lead to a refusal to break free from societal norms, often referred to as “the matrix.”
In this context, it is suggested that those who struggle with these concepts—particularly the more intelligent individuals—may find themselves isolated or ignored. They grapple with the complexities of religious beliefs and often feel disconnected from the mainstream narratives that others accept without question. This isolation can be profound, as these individuals seek to connect the dots of various religious concepts but find themselves at odds with the prevailing ideologies.
Furthermore, the notion of deities is viewed as an illusion, with some arguing that religion has become a means for certain individuals to profit without effort. The idea that a divine savior will rescue humanity from suffering is dismissed, as it is believed that we are trapped in a life that resembles a prison, where suffering is the norm. In this metaphorical prison, people are likened to batteries, used by the “matrix” until their energy is depleted.
Modern tools, such as social media and drugs, are seen as mechanisms that provide temporary relief or false happiness, effectively recharging individuals with fleeting dopamine hits. This cycle encourages people to continue working and contributing to a system that ultimately lacks inherent meaning. The argument posits that no god can save anyone because, fundamentally, gods do not exist. Some even speculate that perhaps a god once existed but was ultimately destroyed by humanity. In this bleak perspective, the conclusion is drawn that, in essence, god is dead, leaving individuals to navigate a world devoid of divine intervention or purpose.
I’m a little lost. I dig it. There are some very real and good ideas in here, but several arguments that seem disconnected with only a theme. Also, who is saying this? In order to engage with ideas one needs to know their broader contexts. Some say, the conclusion is drawn by anonymous people, can be a frustrating read. I don’t take it maliciously or think it purposeful, but this is rhetorical trick generally used to create a monolithic strawman out of a group of diverse thought.
Nietzsche says God is Dead, but Nietzsche isn’t claiming God ever existed, he is claiming the social conditions that supported the belief and perpetuation of a religious ontology had collapsed. Meaning the existing rationale for traditional ethics also dies. Who has unchained the earth from the sun? But he is mainly attacking atheists here, believe it or not. Check out the Madman in the Market. The crowd is atheists that do not know the profundity of God’s death.Pointing out a lot of the loss of meaning that concerns you, and that humanism was basically trying to have your cake and eat it, sticking to Christian principles without God. I would argue the anomie, ennui, nihilism of capitalism is here. He foresaw this as the Last Man.
Marx says famously religion is false consciousness, the existentialists break with religion, Camus’ absurdism, the list is a mile long, a lot of Critical Theory saying what you are suggesting about modern society. But the list of people promoting actual meaninglessness is rather short in my reckoning. It is not “God is dead, so this is all pointless”, for most it is some iteration of “God is dead, so we must construct on his ashes, or rebel against systems of control, or create new values and overcome”.
Also, most philosophers aren’t so neatly bifurcated on religion. They draw heavily on religious thinkers, look at the Existentialists and Wittgenstein’s use of Kierkegaard. The widespread admiration of Simone Weil. Deleuze uses Augustine’s conception of a priori time as becoming and pulls its grounding in God. Philosophers tend to deal in concepts, and honestly the topline question of whether God exists is the least interesting a lot of times. They care about how the concepts produce insights. I have a Kierkegaard tattoo, and I am an atheist. His struggle and engagement with truth as experience, irony, humor, dialectics, philosophy as personal struggle all still are immensely influential for me.
When you mention The Matrix, are you discussing the Wachowski sisters or Andrew Tate, cause there is a big difference lol? The former are actually pulling the Matrix pretty explicitly from Baudrillard, I would argue as an overt metaphor. The book Neo pulls the floppy disk from is by B. Desert of the Real is his term. Their Matrix is loosely the Simulacra of Baudrillard’s capitalism(not the only interpretation of course). His concern is not so much God as how the markets have created their mirror in culture to such a profound degree that what we engage with as reality is largely copies without originals. We watch kitsch retellings of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliette, but they live happily ever after in this one, because the popular conception is that it’s a love story, so it is pulling from that, not the original, it is more Shakespeare than Shakespeare. Then we go eat at Outback, built by guys whose conception of Australia is other commodities-so never referencing an actual place- as we look at streamers on our phone simulating friendships more earnestly than real ones. This is the hyper real. More reality than reality. Also meaninglessness. Trump is basically if market psychosis was a person. His amnesia, id, spite, will to dominate and humiliate, interest in exclusively people as means, all pure postmodern capitalism. This also goes for capitalist religion. Look at how mutilated fundamentalist Christianity has become. It is echoing and forging not the desires of Christ, but those of the market. God as exchange. Christ is a figure of material prosperity, competition, domination, consumption, and disposable spectacle as revelation. A Christian rock band sets up in a 20,000 seat arena to sell a mystical experience and send money to help Israel colonize Palestine. You can watch it on your phone. The world of phantoms for the Matrix analogy is markets, God as commodity. This is the domination of false desires the Matrix is concerned with. Andrew Tate is, like all Right wing grifters, a parasitic creation of the market. Preying on the very alienation the system creates, using its dissatisfaction to preemptively quell any actual dissent. His cure for alienation from capitalism… post memes of him 12 hours a day, become a hedonist, start an MLM, become one of those whose benefits from the system…
All to say, I feel the description of these thinkers as bleak nihilists is misplaced. Nieztsche is explicitly trying to prevent mass nihilism, Camus, one of my faves, says the fight against the absurd is the ontological grounding for human dignity. We gain meaning in our rebellion against domination and cruelty, we become the absurd when we collapse into systems of control. I think you would find The Rebel really interesting.
I wish there was more contemporary biology, psychology, game theory and evolution reflected in phylosophical contemplations. To say religions are human constructs is not completely wrong, but it also oversimplifies the roots of a very complex phenomenon.
In the Bible it is said that God made man in his image.
I always thought it was much more likely that the inverse was actually true: man made God in his image.
You’re starting out on a questionable statement there:
Religions are constructs created by humans
According to some scriptures, religion and religious practices are deity-given, and exactly not human constructs.
