>>11159524>You are putting a fallacious argument in my mouth.sorry fren, you used a liberal talking point. I'm going to call it out. We both know groups of people tend to form stereotypes. I'm merely pointing out one I've noticed about Christians.
>At which point does a personal belief or a value system become a crutch in your view?When it becomes anti life. So Buddhism, Christianity, etc. (see Nietzsche)
>Can something that improves the behavior of a person be rightly called a crutch? Define improved behavior. Many of the christian view points not only are different but are even stark contrasts of Aryan mans vision of being. (the warrior archetype).
>Is doing good a crutch?Define good. Good for survival? Good for over all happiness? More people going to heaven and receiving their eternal dopamine hits?
>Is eating healthy a crutch?No
>After all, eating healthy helps you avoid feeling bad, so it could be viewed as a crutch, right?
It allows for you to live longer and look better. This gives you an opportunity to spread your genes and have those genes survive and live on in the continuum.
>But just so I could argue that man needs to be religious in order to function properly. Where is the difference?Because you could have a religion, or lets say a dogma that isn't built for your particular system and thus it will run errors. Religion itself isn't good. It can be good (if we define good as survival and genetic continuation) or it can be bad. You can live on a bad religion just as you can live on bad food, but you won't feel very well.
