In the end people form all sorts of institutions and ideologies. Some are liberating some are authoritarian. I have seen religion be both things. I have non-religion be both things. In the end it is not the institution or the ideology, rather it is how people use it, pure and simple.
]]>Overall, I think we still agree. It may be that I’m simply arguing semantics, but I think the issue I have is the statement that religion is the formalized process of faith is not necessarily a true definition. There are many things that are not religions do require faith (political ideologies based on hidden assumptions like a future utopia or the inherent rationality of humans) and many aspects of religion that are not necessarily faith based (community, music, food, culture).
Basically, I’m arguing that we break the definition apart and focus our criticisms where they are deserved – on unquestionable faith (what we all agree is wrong).
]]>From someone who spends as much time with atheists as you do, I am surprised to see such a straw man featured so prominently. This mistake undermines your entire thesis.
The position of “New Atheists” is not that religion poisons everything (though that may be Hitchens’ position), it’s that religion or faith (used interchangeably since one is simply the formalized practice of the other) is inherently bad. Inherently harmful. It’s not simply that it leads to “irrational dogma and authoritarian ideologies”, it’s that its very essence is based on either ignorance or denial of fact. In this it stands unique – political ideologies may be and are routinely questioned. It is only in those cases where politics is intertwined with religion that this is not the case.
Faith uniquely shields all claims from criticism, because it ties those claims to things that are not only unknown, but asserted to be “unknowable”. It is this ability to get away with any and all claims, no matter how nutty-bananas they might be, that makes faith dangerous in and of itself. It precludes any attempt to separate truth from fantasy, and can therefore be exploited to justify anything from the absurd to the atrocious.
]]>Religion of one sort or the other is almost universal as a human trait. Every civilization, either ancient or modern utilized core beliefs that attempted to answer individual questions such as:
-who am I?
-why am I here?
-where am I going after this?
When those kind of questions arise, each society, tribe or culture is expected to provide an answer. Throughout history, various convoluted and creative dialogues developed to provide believable answers.
Neandrathal grave sites have been excavated in Europe that contained food stuff, flowers, ochre and weapons. Why would a Neandrathal tribe place things such as this into a burial if there was not some concept that the deceased needed or may need things in whatever ‘after life’ they went to. I make the argument for this that ‘religion’ is not only reserved for human beings … here we have a different humanoid species with what can only be described as ‘religion’ or sacred beliefs.
Existentialism provides a very valid answer to the same three questions. For an athiest, the answer to the questions must be:
-you are a living entity now who will cease to exist at the cessation of your bodily function
-there is no reason for you being here
-you aren’t going anywhere … dead is dead.
Lots of people have difficulty accepting existential / athiestic answers like those.
So .. I ask the question; is there an individual need to understand our existence both in terms of our own life and our place in whatever culture we find ourselves?
Hindu theology thinks in terms of a cosmic universe that is Trillions of years old with cosmic eras that last millions of years. Fundamentalist Christians believe that the earth/universe is about 8000 years old. Hundreds of millions of people adhere to one or the other of these very different ‘religious’ beliefs. I guess if it works for you .. great.
But as you wrote, when some tribes/cultures start killing or oppressing those who don’t share their view or have divergent belief .. then we have a problem. Let’s face it, over centuries, lots and lots of people died over idiotic religious conflicts. Stupid .. yet very very human.
Sorry for the ramble. Interesting topic and I’m glad you dipped your toe into these waters.
Amen …. (or not)
]]>