In online discussions with Christians, one point often came up from them that atheism or free thought are religions of sorts. I would ask them (rhetorically) what do we have to do to not be a religion.
In asking that question, it does not mean I have a distaste for the word "religion", but that seeing my beliefs about the world came about by applying the simple principle of parsimony or "Occams Razor" or perhaps embodied by the more popular acronym "KISS" -- Keep It Simple Stupid, I can build a very strong case to deny that comparison.
To me, religion implies a multiplicity of independent, and unverifiable beliefs as determined by culture. And conversely, it is easily imagined that a person could grow up without any culture at all , and probably have no belief in a God as a result. It is not a stretch to think that could happen, given a lack of indoctrination. And note that the unindoctrinated person would still have naturalistic beliefs about the natural world, which he/she would inevitably experience.
But religions generally require specific instruction (creed), enculturation and reinforcement (eg. in-group discipline)
Christians may intend to "even out the playing field" in a debate by getting us to admit that atheists as a group are just adherents to another belief system and so have no special status as a philosophical stance. But atheism is not a belief system at all. Rather, it is a natural consequence of naturalism, which in turn is a single unified application of ordinary (and I should stress "limited") reason we use to plan our day. Travelling to work by car, diagnoses of diseases, and gardening are all performed with assumptions consistent with naturalistic methods.
But while it is clear that my principles (and others in our group) are not dogmatic (nor are they wishy washy) there is still a danger of exhibiting the bad parts of strident religion ourselves if we are not mindful. If we're not careful as a free thought group, the "just another religion" accusation of Christians may then have some validity.
I agree with you...just as religion has a tendency to be dogmatic, so can Atheism or any other belief system for that matter. It is something we always need to be very mindful of... because I think it is simply in HUMAN NATURE for all of us to want to be right...and each of us need to be mindful of that...it's not just something that comes from people with religious beliefs.
ReplyDeleteFree Thought should never be exclusive to one view...although, of course, we will ALL will have our views that we lean towards! :) But when something cannot be PROVEN either way, we should always be careful not to come across like it does, because at that point, it is using the same approach as religion does. One should always be open to learning more and be open to other views. If the belief that there is "no god" or the belief that there "could be a god" makes anyone uneasy, perhaps we really need to ask ourselves, why? Because really, what is there to be afraid of, if we are not talking about dogmatic beliefs?? ...in my opinion nothing at all! :)
After our discussion Sunday, our newest member (Lor...) shared a link with us (that her sister shared with her) and she felt it gave a good angle of what we, as facilitators, were trying to convey last Sunday. It is a link regarding a book called: "The God Theory." Upon looking through this link, I found it something we would personally be VERY interested in reading! We have been researching a lot regarding Atheism lately, but I think it's time for us to get another view on simple faith too...just to even out everything. This link seems to do just that..although, we still have yet to order the book and see if it is as good as it appears. :)
Here's the link:
http://www.thegodtheory.com/
Also check out this link too for Q/A to the book:
http://www.thegodtheory.com/questionsanswers.htm
Truth Seeker (Group Facilitator)
I agree with you completely about human nature, and it is also human to want certainty. People grow up with that kind of comfort and are not accustomed to dealing with harsh uncertainties.
ReplyDeleteOne big influence on me has been Chris Mooney, who does interviews for Point of Inquiry. He is an advocate for accommodationism, which calls for less debate, less "motivated reasoning" and more understanding and acceptance of other views. I know you don't like dry podcasts but his views are outlined here:
http://tinyurl.com/5w7nnxc
You can also read his blog entry here, in which he touches on motivated reasoning:
http://tinyurl.com/6w4wyu9
by the way, "Ken", the pod cast seems very interesting...will try to make time for it...do you know approx how long it is? it does not seem to say like most videos do!
DeleteAccording to my player, it's 52 minutes.
DeleteH Ken,
ReplyDeleteI read your blog entry and followed most of the links you suggested. Whether someone believes in a god or not is unimportant to me. Behaviours that stem from these beliefs are important to me. I believe that as a society that is becoming increasingly global, we need to agree on a set of rules/rights that trump religion and cross cultural boundaries.
Lorien
And for me as well, it matters little whether someone believes in a god or not. I married a Christian and made no effort to change her supernatural beliefs.
ReplyDeleteIt is strident religiousity and, as you say, the resulting behavior that I'm more concerned about, particularly religious dogmatism.
This doesn't mean that I don't think there is a set of optimal values that should eventually supercede religions. I'm not a moral relativist. Just that I believe that an optimal set of morals is likely a fuzzy set, fuzzy enough to allow at least a little wiggle room for cultural diversity or even personal preference -- such as the dilemma of welfare of the unborn versus the right of a women to control her body. And there will always be those freak situations where one principle or right competes with another principle or right. What will tip the balance in those cases?
The point here is dialogue and political realism. Some secularists such as Sam Harris argue that liberal or moderate theists are "enabling" the more extreme fundamentalists and so ultimately religion is should be taken down, while others like Mooney are trying to tone down the arrogance, shrillness and disrespect shown by some theists and some so-called rational atheists alike, that all such attitudes are actually emotionally-based and not rational.
The point you raise about an increasingly global society is a good one. We may be already there and there are certainly pressing global issues right now. I agree completely that we need a global morality to match -- maybe, some day. :)