What's Your Faith, Or Lack Of It?

[immortalpuppet]

Its a Trilogy, its no Lord of the Rings though

 

Why hasnt anyone posted a link to the Church of the flying Spaghetti monster?

[Chinahand]

I think VinnieK and Skeddan have been a little hard on Dawkins over what God is.

 

Skeddan's link to Witgenstein misses Dawkins' point - of course there could be extremely rarefied ideas of God - but Dawkins doesn't really address those - What he is addressing is a definition of God which deals with an intervening deity who created the world, and still acts to uphold it. Its a god who has a created a purposeful universe with humanity a part of that purpose.

 

It's more subtle than the bearded man in the clouds, but is still a pretty blunt definition - I don't think he is particularly concerned with deists, or gnostics who discount the demiurge!

[VinnieK]

As a scientist, quasi-philosopher and general talking head, Dawkins should be aware of the importance of the precision of terms.

 

In any case, it's not fantastically difficult to come up with a concept of god that isn't entirely rarefied, but avoids most contradictions with science. All you need to do is look for holes in current scientific knowledge and say that's the level upon which god operates and express intervention more in terms of gentle influence. Et Voila! A religion in the making. Current religions could then exploit the allegorical side of their sacred texts to fit the explanation and blame technical inconsistencies and contradictions and flaws of human perception and interpretation when acting under this influence, and so on.

 

As an aside, one thing about modern atheism that's always interested me is just how similar it is to the broad narratives of Christianity. Broadly speaking we have

 

The fall of man: natural man seduced by the allure of religion.

 

The corruption of mankind and crisis of morality: mankind corrupted and subjugated by religion which leads it to wickedness, tyranny and conflict.

 

Salvation: The Enlightenment/Newton/Darwin/whatever. Held up to have delivered humanity from the shackles of religion and promising a paradise if the principles being espoused are followed.

 

Revelations: Dawkin's hyperbole regarding a new dark age of superstition and the tyranny of religious thinking, ultimately leading to some grand cataclysm or battle.

 

Hell, it even has some of the characteristics of a revealed religion, with the likes of Darwin, Einstein, et al being shoehorned into the role of agents through which the true nature of existence is communicated.

 

I confess that I do sometimes wonder if atheism's heightened popularity in the West is in part due to the fact that it in fact shares a fair portion of Christianity's basic themes and narrative - being the acceptable face of a more traditional fixation with notions of crisis, salvation and the compulsion to proselytise.

[Lao]

that actually sounds a little too contrived, Christianity and atheism dont really seem that alike to me VinnieK, for a start christians have a basic structure for belief, whilst you mave find slightly different versions or interpretations there is a source for the information, the church and the bible.

 

No such structure exists for atheists, there is no such thing as the church of atheism (i claim copyright) where atheists gather on a regular basis to understand the basic tennent of the (non) faith and no (un) holy book to guide the budding atheist on the path to enlightenment.

 

when asked to describe their faith, christians will give answers that are variation on a theme but many atheists will have wildly different answers from each other as to why they dont believe.

 

and this is probably the most fundamental difference atheism is the absence of belief. comparing christianity to atheism doesnt work the in the same way as say comparing christianity to islam, hinduism or buddhism.

 

however many atheists do seem to have accepted science as a form of faith, and your comparison fits much better when comparing christian beliefs to that of a atheist/science worshipper.

 

Is this the pit fall that atheist should watch out for, or evidence that faith in something is genetic? (oh no i sounded just like Dawkins i've fallen in the pit!)

[VinnieK]

Christianity and atheism dont really seem that alike to me VinnieK, for a start christians have a basic structure for belief, whilst you mave find slightly different versions or interpretations there is a source for the information, the church and the bible...

 

Which is why I specified a thematic or symbolic similarity, not a stuctural one or an affinity in the nature and organization of belief.

[Lao]

sorry VinnieK i could'nt wait up for your reply, had to get up early to run the beach, i can kinda get behind what your saying, atheism has come about at a time when religion is poplar, in effect ateism has grown up surrounded by religion and some things have rubbed off on it. Atheists may have also once been religous and some of the behavioral traits may remain, turning from worshipping a religous icon to idolising figures such as Newton/Darwin.

 

I will agree with your earlier assement, i feel however that the reason for any similarilty lies in the fact that atheism has grown from the ashes of religion.

[Pat Ayres]

sorry VinnieK i could'nt wait up for your reply, had to get up early to run the beach, i can kinda get behind what your saying, atheism has come about at a time when religion is poplar, in effect ateism has grown up surrounded by religion and some things have rubbed off on it. Atheists may have also once been religous and some of the behavioral traits may remain, turning from worshipping a religous icon to idolising figures such as Newton/Darwin.

 

I will agree with your earlier assement, i feel however that the reason for any similarilty lies in the fact that atheism has grown from the ashes of religion.

How ridiculous to say atheism has grown from religion. We are all atheist at birth, that realism is slowly taken away and abused by the introduction of religion and it's dogma over some years to the point where religious education is compulsory in schools. If it were so self evident why teach it?

Atheism has not grown out of religion, atheism came first.

Religion has grown out of fear and ignorance, ignorance of the masses exploited by the wealthy and educated minority to instill fear and therefore control.

[triskelion]

Beware of using 'religion' as a blanket term.

[loaf]

How ridiculous to say atheism has grown from religion. We are all atheist at birth...

Yes, but we're not talking about an individual's development, we're talking about the development of humanity as a whole.

 

Humanity started off ignorant. It couldn't have started off atheistic since there was no theism to disregard.

 

Humanity sought more knowledge to understand the world. Mortality was high, lifespans short. To paraphrase and extend a Dawkins example, if you farmed crops and they all went bad, whilst other farmers around you succeeded with theirs, what was your explanation? You didn't know about biology, you didn't know about microbes, bacteria, disease. Your only methods of reasoning were correlation, causation and a belief in 'unseen agents', and frankly you couldn't tell these three apart, most of the time.

 

Being rather unimaginative, you put human values on these 'unseen agents' - you thought that you could persuade whatever was destroying some crops but leaving others by 'getting them on your side', by giving them things you value, sacrifice, praise - every trick in the book that you would use to suck up to another human. And a fat lot of good it did for bacteria, but since your farming practices might differ from another farmer's, and might have something to do with the spread of disease, some farmers would do better than others - so they thought, again, that this process of sucking up to the 'unseen agent' was having some effect.

 

As science has progressed, understood bacteria, disease more and more, the process of worshipping something so that your crops don't die seems ridiculous and so that branch of theism dies out. As Vinnie says, religion does seem to exist in the gaps of our knowledge. Our knowledge improves, and our disregard for such religious or deistic practice diminishes as a result.

 

Nowadays, polytheism seems ridiculous to Christians, Muslims as well as atheists, but it seemed a good idea to hedge one's bets at the time. I see the three monotheistic religions as the ones with the biggest and most water-tight propaganda machines in place. Personally, I was subjected to daily prayers, daily hymns, church services throughout my school life. I dare say that if I'd spent this time being forced to learn or recite the books of any other subject like this I'd be pretty clued up about it by now, but for some reason, I know very little about the bible.

 

It has taken TV debates, books and programmes by Jonathan Miller, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens et al, for me to examine what was a large part of my childhood and clarify what the hell it was all about. Going back to your point, certainly my personal feelings of disbelief, humanism, whatever, have come out of being forced into theistic practices as a child.

[jimbms]

The only thing organised religion is good for is creating wars and a lot of pissing and moaning. They are the most leeching shitheads in the world. And the sick thing is, morons will actually send them money for what they do! They claim to be speaking the word of God, so they send them everything they have just so they can buy big cars and mansions, the so called high priest the pope has a personal chef and eats from gold plates. There are people who will hate something just because their church tells them to, like homosexuality. I'm not gay, but I don't hate those who are. The Only reason people hate gays is because they are told to, and they are so weak that they believe every word of it. They also complain that they just aren't happy without religion. NO SHIT!? Nobody is truly happy on this planet. Welcome to the real world. I'm not living my life just to prepare for a highly unbelievable after-life. I'm living my life just for that, LIFE. And that life will not be based upon a 2000-year-old collection of stories. No way. And there are no taxes on anything church related. Why is that? Churches are a business. Believe it or not, they are. They have expenses, profits, and incomes, they also own more properties than anyone and gain rent from them; all of which should be taxed just like the rest of us. I should become a priest just so I can rake in money and not pay taxes on any of it. Sure, I'd have to deal with all of those churchgoers, but everybody has something about their job that they hate. If you want to see the effects of religion in history, just look at the Roman Empire, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Church of England, and all of the shit going on in the Middle East, Africa, and the old communist states. Lots of help the churches have given us in the past 2000 years. Also, the wankers that are always trying to convert you to their way of thinking deserve to be shot in the head. It's as if I hadn't noticed that their way of thinking exists. Yes, you moron, I've noticed, and I want no part of it. Go move to Jerusalem. Or London. I'm sure they would be glad to listen to your banter for hours. But, overall, my favourite kind of religionists are the Sunday Saints. You know whom I'm talking about. There is one in every family. The people who go to church on Sunday, act holy and in worship and praise, and for the other six days of the week do things like piss off other drivers on the road, scream obscenities at their children, abuse people verbally, physically, and emotionally, and so on. But for that one-day of the week, they are righteous and holy. Organised religion in general makes me sick, but that kind take it all to a new level. If only people could see the evils that are in front of them, a lot of problems could be solved.

[Lao]

Skrappy you are correct, when we are born we have no concept of faith, outside of the structure of a family, a child has faith in its parents. as the child grows older it may very well take on the belief of its parent or from another outside influence.

 

the idea that a no-religion/faith stand point grew out of a religion/faith stand point is ridiculous when put in these terms.

 

but to put forward the idea that atheism grew out of religion is no so ridiculous when one considers the terminology, no religion and atheism are not quite the same thing, if they was no such thing as religion, there would be no such thing as atheism, atheists are those who do not believe in god or gods, in order for there to be atheist there must be theists, those who do. you may feel that this is hardly worth quibbling over but it does cover my point.

 

Theism held sway over the masses and atheists would be persecuted for their lack of faith if they were honest about it. science was held back for fear of contradicting the church or bible, but over time people had braved that persecution and have brought us to the point where there are now 1.1 billion people willing admitting to being atheists. theism has been around a lot longer and atheism has had to work hard to shake off the stigma that accompanied it.

 

as to God existing in the gaps of our sciences, that is such a cop out! when i read Hawkins brief history of time, i felt that when he mentioned something similar (several times if i recall) it was so that he would not have to face persecution and opposition from the faithful. It felt like looking at the old maps they made before they had a full knowledge of the world, when he came to a part of the world undiscovered the cartographer would draw a gigantic beast with the disclaimer underneath "here there be monsters".

 

No, there really isn't.

[triskelion]

jimbms: For someone who claims to deplore bigotry, you don't exactly seem to be in any hurry to avoid an irrational distaste for organised religion. You've just lumped everything together and gone on an ignorant rant largely based entirely on a Euro-centric view of the World. Take Quakers, or the Armish - both organised religions, and neither are likely to start any wars. Religions don't pay taxes in a lot of places because they have CHARITABLE status, and thus have to organise themselves along such lines. Clergy presumably still pay income tax, so I'm not sure what your problem is in that regard. Certainly none of Island's priesthood seem to bathe in exuberant wealth.

 

Way to cherry-pick from history, but none of your examples do much to support an anti-religious case, and generally ignore the intergral part religion played in people's perception of the World. Romanic expansion was driven largely by economic factors, the Crusades, well, its difficult in this day-and-age to understand just how large Jerusalem loomed in the minds of many European folk, but again, a big driver was economics; with the potential for many nobles with few prospects to gain lands in the East. Similarly with the inquistion, it is difficult to relate to how heretics would have been perceived. They would have been considered a major destabilising force. In fact, the Catholics at the time probably considered the Cathars et al as disruptive as you seem to think 'organised religion' is.

 

If you are looking for ways in which religion has benefited the people of Europe of the past 2000 years, how about being the main source of literacy and chronicling for hundreds of years? Or being a major source of education provision even to today? What about the Hospitaller Knights of St John, formed in the Crusades, but surviving to the modern era as the St John's Ambulance?

 

Its also worth noting that the term 'atheist' did not really take on the contempory meaning (ie. denies the existance of deities) until the 18th century at the earliest. Its use prior to that is inconstant and inconsistent, existing largely as a pejorative against those who denied the orthodoxy.

[keyboarder]

If you are looking for ways in which religion has benefited the people of Europe of the past 2000 years, how about being the main source of literacy and chronicling for hundreds of years? Or being a major source of education provision even to today? What about the Hospitaller Knights of St John, formed in the Crusades, but surviving to the modern era as the St John's Ambulance?

 

Not to mention music, the benefit of which is so great as to be immeasurable. Why, I bet even jimbms likes a song or two that uses tempered western tonality as it's basis. Although I wouldn't be surprised if s/he is tone deaf, lol,lol. ; ))

[jimbms]

Ah don't mind me I just got up with a hangover and decided to have a rant, I was just making a point that a lot of religions it seems the leaders live in luxury whilst their followers get told to help the poor, Keyboarder yep your right I couldnt sing in tune if I only had to do one note and it's he the name Jim gives the clue

[Lao]

The last few posts have made a go at presenting the positive effects religion has had on the lives of the people. i have to say that this is probably a good idea, it will probably help restore a balance and help us to avoid bigotry and hatred.

 

However i don't think good arguments have been put forward so far:

 

education- while religion may have done much to educate the people to a degree it has always come at a price. those that control the education control what is being learned, you can hardly call the education of the people a noble goal if that goal also included influencing what they think and what they know. it may be a selfless act on the monks part but he is simply a cog in a propaganda machine of epic proportions that justifies itself because it knows its faith is the right one. would the church have been so proud of the Gutenberg bible had they know that the new printing press and the free speech that was to come with it was to become a major thorn in its side? (i do however totally acknowledge that something is better than nothing and that keeping libraries is a point in their favor)

 

Music- this is such a two way deal, without religion we would still of had music but may well have to put up without some of the great composers, who were undoubtedly influenced by their great love affair with the church. religion on the other hand owes much to music, hymns and inspiring music put bums in seats. regardless of this music would still be with us with or with out religion.

 

So what has religion given to us? well you could argue the case for comfort when faced with the death of a loved one, and for establishing codes of laws which eventually became judicial systems. these sound a little more rational to me.