A Last Word On Hitchens

[poliphilo]

I spent much of yesterday on Hitchens' website. I think he's doing important work. Someone needs to be knocking religion- and he's good at it. But only up to a point. The debate never gets much more sophisticated than "So where did Cain's wife come from, eh?"  He's a clever person of limited culture- with a layman's understanding of Victorian science- butting against positions that became untenable a hundred and fifty years ago. It's a weary old war and I withdrew from it a while ago, but I'm glad there are still people out there in the field, bashing away.

Comments

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Because religion lies about things that are`too important to lie about.

Because it messes up people's lives in all sorts of ways.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

To your point A: theology is specifically about the metaphysical, and therefore is not subject to physical analysis. Therefore, it is impossible to determine whether it is lying or not.

To your point B: while it's quite possible to point to ways in which specific people, and cultures, have been messed up by religion, it is ALSO quite possible to point out ways in which OTHER people, and cultures, have had their lives ENHANCED by religion. I've never seen any real analysis about whether the net effect is positive or negative. Have you?

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I'm talking about religion, not theology. Religions assert all sorts of things as "fact" which we can be fairly certain are untrue- for example that the pope, speaking, ex cathedra, is infallible, or that the Koran is the final and all-sufficient authority on life the universe and everything. The function of theology is to make some sort of philosophical sense of the "revealed" truths of religion- an endeavour bound to result in futility.

I take your point B. Clearly there's no way of quantifying the positive and negative effects of religion. There are times and places in which it has had a civilising effect. Gothic architecture or the crusades- which weighs more? But we're talking about the past- about a time when religion was so closely woven into the fabric of society that it's impossible to separate out. Things changed at the end of the Middle Ages and religion, still clinging to a world view that is no longer credible- has become a drag on the intellectual and spiritual development of humanity.

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

Actually, there is a theory kicking about, these days, that religion may have been the impetus for civilization as we know it. A growing body of evidence seems to imply that, contrary to conventional wisdom, agricultural may have arisen in support of organized spiritual activity and not the other way around.

So, there may be good reason why religion has been an inseparable part of society and often remains so today.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

That's interesting.

If you can direct me to the evidence I'd be very grateful.

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

Göbekli Tepe

It's an article crafted for popular consumption, yet still lays out the gist of the idea. I found out about it through this site, just recently, but precisely when and in what context escapes me now.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Thank you. That's fascinating.

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

For someone accustomed to the idea of a neolithic agricultural revolution, one that supposedly made us what we are today, I think this is just mind-blowing.