RE: Imagine A World Without Religion.
August 24, 2012 at 5:48 am
(This post was last modified: August 24, 2012 at 6:08 am by Tempus.)
I don't think religion disappearing is necessarily a good thing. Perhaps the disappearance of the more dogmatic religions (or sub-sects of) is a necessary precondition for a more flourishing society. I don't know. I object to the notion that prayer and other religious practices are always a waste of time. While I agree mumbling to yourself "dear gawd pls keep grandma safe and get me a new bike, x-bawx, etc" before bed is useless (and, in a way, subtly harmful), not all prayer involves that. Deep introspection is something I consider important and lacking in many people and, from what I've learned, prayer can offer the opportunity for that. Is prayer necessary or exclusively for that? No, it's not. But I think too many people, although acknowledging them, downplay the positive roles religion can serve. [editted to add: additionally, criticising (and praising) religion with generalisations is difficult and usually inaccurate. The word 'religion' is like 'sport' and encompasses so many different practices. Ice skating, when watched, is almost like art at times, whereas a game of American football or rugby can look like war. That nuance is lost in the haste to generalise.]
My own opinion is that religious roles can be fulfilled outside of the context of religion. I think many (Western, at least - I'm pretty ignorant of Eastern religions) religious attitudes are ultimately limiting. At the end of the day you still need to accept some core propositions which can't be contradicted. Whereas in my own worldview, for example, I can question and totally overturn anything; nothing is off limits. I imagine the reason many people, consciously or unconsciously, adopt a pre-existing, somewhat limited view is because it's a lot of work to figure out your own and the freedom (which so many people supposedly value) is dizzying and frightening. Also, if you're in pursuit of truth, you may encounter inconclusive answers / shades of grey and have to tolerate the ambiguity. The search for truth is antithetical to the presuppositional religious traditions, which is why I consider them limited.
I don't really know what the hell my point is or why I started typing. I will say, however, that I think many of the non-religious are just as limited in some respects as their religious counterparts. If you have some fundamental value or goal that cannot be questioned, that cannot in principle (even if it doesn't actually occur in practice) be overturned, how are you any more liberated than the uncompromising religious you criticize?
My own opinion is that religious roles can be fulfilled outside of the context of religion. I think many (Western, at least - I'm pretty ignorant of Eastern religions) religious attitudes are ultimately limiting. At the end of the day you still need to accept some core propositions which can't be contradicted. Whereas in my own worldview, for example, I can question and totally overturn anything; nothing is off limits. I imagine the reason many people, consciously or unconsciously, adopt a pre-existing, somewhat limited view is because it's a lot of work to figure out your own and the freedom (which so many people supposedly value) is dizzying and frightening. Also, if you're in pursuit of truth, you may encounter inconclusive answers / shades of grey and have to tolerate the ambiguity. The search for truth is antithetical to the presuppositional religious traditions, which is why I consider them limited.
I don't really know what the hell my point is or why I started typing. I will say, however, that I think many of the non-religious are just as limited in some respects as their religious counterparts. If you have some fundamental value or goal that cannot be questioned, that cannot in principle (even if it doesn't actually occur in practice) be overturned, how are you any more liberated than the uncompromising religious you criticize?
