The result is not unexpected given the typically hostile view the magazine holds toward religion. But, the result is scary none the less as the magazine has a massive circulation and is read by leaders of industry, government, and academia as well as wannabe thinkers like me. I don't usually comment on online articles but I couldn't resist this time. Here's what I had to say:
Dear Sir,
It seems that the working assumption on both sides of the motion is that God does not exist and that religion's primary benefits are fostering a sense of community and the enjoyment of ritual. When weighed against the clear evils that have been done in the name of religion such as Islamist terrorism, the widespread conclusion that it is not on balance a force for good is understandable.
I suggest that if both sides started with the assumption that we are created beings longing to be in touch with our creator, this debate would have been entirely different. That said, without getting into the debate about the truth of religion it is still a force for good on both an individual and societal level.
On an individual level religion provides meaning and answers the basic question of why we are here and what is our purpose. There is no satisfactory answer provided by atheists.
Religion empowers people through prayer. When there is little or nothing you can do individually to change a situation, prayer offers something positive that can be done.
As a society, religion defines virtue. Secularists and unbelievers can claim to be moral (and very often are), but that morality must be measured against an objective standard and without religion no such standards would exist.
The point was made well that religion builds community. I can speak personally to that, attending world Youth Day in Toronto in 2002 was a chance to see 1 million people gather to participate in the mass led by Pope John Paul the Great. Looking around and seeing the faith, energy, and enthusiasm from people from countless cultures and every corner of the planet was a truly transformative event in my life.
The criticisms leveled against religion seem to assume that it is an irrational opinion to hold. However Pope Benedict has made explaining the mutual dependence of faith on reason and vice versa a cornerstone of his papacy.I applaud the Economist for attempting to debate this important topic, however, next time I’d encourage inviting people with more theological depth and breadth
to participate.
+of+2010+Feb+015.jpg){kind=link}
5 comments:
I am not a religious person, but I graduated from Protestant Sunday School, and I have always abided by the big rules. I think that morality is good for society. I may not believe in God, but I follow the 10 Commandments because they make sense. Society is better if we don't murder and steal. The one rule that I have most often violated is idol worship. Steve Yzerman and Wayne Gretzky are Gods among men...
"I don't believe in God, but I'm afraid of him"
-The Usual Suspects
This is really a trick question that can drive people to make the assumption that we would be better off without religion. Which is really the right question to ask.
This question lacks an understanding of what it is getting at. Everybody practices some sort of belief whether we call it religion or not. Even atheist belief in something, though they may not identify with a religion.
First, the question is too broad in that lumps all religious beliefs and the variety of attitudes toward those beliefs in the same pile. Obviously some religious beliefs are very good for society and others are not.
Certain people who say they are part of a religious belief can easily act in the opposite direction of that belief, being evil instead of good.
For example, can you blame the Christianity for the pedophile priests in the Catholic Church? Did the Crusaders act within the guidelines of the Christian beliefs when they were hacking their way through to the Holy land? Are people who call themselves Catholic, Baptist, and Jewish but show little or no evidence for acting within the requirements of their faith really representatives of belief in that faith?
The right answer in all three of these situations is no. Faulty believers do not make religion a force for evil. When people who say they are believers, but do not follow that belief, does not make the belief system wrong.
Then there are obvious religious systems or beliefs that are bad for society i.e. witchcraft and beliefs that promote human sacrifice, Jim Jones, etc. Then there are people that take a religious belief system and twist and turn it to make it bad, like the church out of Wichita that protest military funerals.
So to say all religious beliefs are bad because a few are or the individuals and groups that corrupt the true beliefs, is to falsely accuse religion in general.
It is impossible to measure all the good that religious belief has provided to society because of the selfless acts that take place that go unrecorded. Most believers do not even want to take credit or get recognition for their acts of goodness. So it is something that is impossible to measure.
Then there are the situations that get public attention where religion is a factor but the driving force was economic and social differences. Take the Catholic-Protestant wars in Northern Ireland. They are really rooted in English-Irish social, economic and racial issues.
Since religion seems to permeate the planet, it is important to look the other side of the coin. What about places and times where religious belief has been suppressed or eliminated, and what happen in those situations? Take the Kimer Rouge in Cambodia, Communism (in the Soviet Union and China) and Hitler’s Nazis. In these cases the good religious beliefs were suppressed and it resulted has been suffering and the death of millions. It amounted to way more suffering than from any bad events attributed to religion. Most of the events attributed to religion and had causes that were really rooted in social and economic issues.
With those facts it is easier to understand why it is true that religion is generally a force for good in society.
Great letter, Patrick! Thanks for posting. I added my own comments at the Economist's website. As you say, they would prefer we be silenced. But that only happens if we refuse to speak out, doesn't it?
Andrea
I received an email comment from BC500, but it didn't show up here so I'm reposting it as received:
BC500 said ...
This is really a trick question that can drive people to make the assumption that we would be better off without religion. Which is really the right question to ask.
This question lacks an understanding of what it is getting at. Everybody practices some sort of belief whether we call it religion or not. Even atheist belief in something, though they may not identify with a religion.
First, the question is too broad in that lumps all religious beliefs and the variety of attitudes toward those beliefs in the same pile. Obviously some religious beliefs are very good for society and others are not.
Certain people who say they are part of a religious belief can easily act in the opposite direction of that belief, being evil instead of good.
For example, can you blame the Christianity for the pedophile priests in the Catholic Church? Did the Crusaders act within the guidelines of the Christian beliefs when they were hacking their way through to the Holy land? Are people who call themselves Catholic, Baptist, and Jewish but show little or no evidence for acting within the requirements of their faith really representatives of belief in that faith?
The right answer in all three of these situations is no. Faulty believers do not make religion a force for evil. When people who say they are believers, but do not follow that belief, does not make the belief system wrong.
Then there are obvious religious systems or beliefs that are bad for society i.e. witchcraft and beliefs that promote human sacrifice, Jim Jones, etc. Then there are people that take a religious belief system and twist and turn it to make it bad, like the church out of Wichita that protest military funerals.
So to say all religious beliefs are bad because a few are or the individuals and groups that corrupt the true beliefs, is to falsely accuse religion in general.
It is impossible to measure all the good that religious belief has provided to society because of the selfless acts that take place that go unrecorded. Most believers do not even want to take credit or get recognition for their acts of goodness. So it is something that is impossible to measure.
Then there are the situations that get public attention where religion is a factor but the driving force was economic and social differences. Take the Catholic-Protestant wars in Northern Ireland. They are really rooted in English-Irish social, economic and racial issues.
Since religion seems to permeate the planet, it is important to look the other side of the coin. What about places and times where religious belief has been suppressed or eliminated, and what happen in those situations? Take the Kimer Rouge in Cambodia, Communism (in the Soviet Union and China) and Hitler’s Nazis. In these cases the good religious beliefs were suppressed and it resulted has been suffering and the death of millions. It amounted to way more suffering than from any bad events attributed to religion. Most of the events attributed to religion and had causes that were really rooted in social and economic issues.
With those facts it is easier to understand why it is true that religion is generally a force for good in society.
Andrea,
I saw your comment on the Economist. They need to hear that.
Iceman,
You made me smile twice in the same paragraph. Thanks.
Post a Comment