DoomYoshi wrote:Resource number one is a bit older, but one that I have referenced quite a few times:
https://www.artofmanliness.com/characte ... e-beliefs/The reasons, in short:
- Greater social support
- chance to slow down and think
- builds discipline
- power in ritual
- stronger marriage
- develops successful, well-rounded kids
- communal singing
- forces you to listen to other perspectives (to defeat the social media echo chamber)
- promotes freethinking and diversity of ideas
- lessens partisanship
- opportunities to serve in the community
- greater health
Granted, this is all true. People who participate in regular church activities tend to be happier, more well-adjusted members of society than people who don't. Which is why I tend to support the existence of churches despite my distaste for the things they preach.
But can these benefits not accrue from secular interests in which similar things are done?
For instance, I've seen plenty of studies that volunteering (in general, regardless of purpose) tends to make people happier. If someone derives a sense of purpose from serving in a church-sponsored soup kitchen, does he not derive the same sense of purpose if he serves in a secular soup kitchen?
If someone derives happiness from communal singing in church, does he derive a similar level of happiness from singing in his local amateur operatic society? Etc.
I'm wondering if the studies you cite are just comparing people who go to church to people who do nothing for their community. I'd be interested if among those studies, you have some that compare apples to apples: people who regularly participate in their church organization versus people who devote a similar level of effort to participating in some nonreligious community organizations.
DoomYoshi wrote:The "Blue Zones" refers to the regions of the world where people are most likely to live to 100 years old. What do they have in common? Lots of things. No surprise that this is on the list "All but five of the 263 centenarians we interviewed belonged to some faith-based community."
https://www.bluezones.com/2016/11/power-9/#
I'm a big fan of Blue Zones research, but everyone comes to things with their own prejudices. Buettner is a great guy but like everyone else he sees things through his own lens.
Buettner uses the widest-possible definition of 'faith-based community'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think in order to arrive at the number, he classifies the Okinawan
moais as being faith-based. Granted, discussions of religion and spirituality are part of what a
moai does, but only a small part. Essentially, they are social organizations, mutual-assistance circles with mainly social and economic goals. Would they not accomplish the same task if the tiny religious components were completely removed from them?