E-mail
Print
Reason versus faith
Is there room for faith in logic?
By Jeff Flashinski
The definition of faith is a firm belief in something for which there is no proof.
The U.S. is one of the most religiously fundamentalist countries in the world, and religious institutions have a lot of influence on Americans. The views of these institutions are rarely questioned or analyzed, but they should be, because of their enormous power and influence. I believe that religion in its organized form has been very detrimental to the human race and has commonly been a tool for the powerful to oppress the poor.
Religion promotes subordination to authority and often foments religious and racial intolerance. This intolerance flows naturally from the irrational thinking which is taught by religion. The major religions declare the existence of a heaven and hell and tend toward the opinion that those in their religion and sect will be going to heaven and that all others will be going to hell. There is a supreme arrogance and self-righteousness about this belief. Seeing how ethnicity and religion are often associated, this religious superiority can lead to a feeling of ethnic superiority.
The effect of religious institutions is to warp members into a wholly unscientific way of thinking. This is done by depicting the universe in a supernatural way for which the institution has no evidence. The members are supposed to accept this version of the world on faith alone. The definition of faith is a firm belief in something for which there is no proof. But we use our minds to gather evidence, draw conclusions from that evidence and then try to determine what the truth is.
One can notice the effect on a society which generally subscribes to irrational beliefs. Currently, the Scandinavian countries lead the world in living standards in terms of health care, education, economic inequality, social welfare programs, etc. According to the United Nations, Human Development Index, Iceland is ranked number 1, Norway is number 2, Sweden is number 6 and Finland is number 11. I do not think it is a coincidence that these nations are secular and also are leaders in agnosticism.
Meanwhile, the countries which pose the greatest threat to world peace are the highly religious fundamentalist countries, such as the United States, Israel and Pakistan. The United States has a massive nuclear weapon supply, which currently totals more than 8,000 weapons. Combining that with the U.S. contempt for international law and its aggressive militarism it is no wonder that most of the world sees the U.S. as the leading threat to world peace.
Israel is dangerous because it is a rogue state which is more militarized than Germany was during the 1930s and 40s, according to Martin van Creveld, a leading Israeli military historian. Israel also has been carrying out a 40-year illegal occupation of Palestine and possesses hundreds of nuclear weapons, refusing to sign the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Pakistan is also dangerous because it contains various terrorist groups and has an unstable government much hated by the Pakistani population. It too is in possession of nuclear weapons (which it sold to North Korea) and refuses to sign the NPT.
In the last millennium religion has repeatedly stood in the way of scientific progress. The church fought against the Copernican Revolution and imprisoned Galileo. The Christians killed more than one million people accused of being “witches.” For centuries, it was common practice to torture those deemed insane because they were believed to have been possessed by the “devil.” The church also prevented the development of medicine (as it still does with stem cell research), and, to this day, it rejects the theory of evolution in favor of its primitive mythology called “Creationism.”
The church gives those who belong to it the sense that there is a final purpose and an eternal justice. While I feel it is beautiful to hope that there is a final purpose and that someday the world will be just, I do not feel it is correct to turn a hope into a belief, and I feel even stronger that is quite incorrect and dangerous to make this unfounded hope the base of one’s world view and value system.
I think the human race, in order to survive and overcome its war-mongering ways, must eventually choose the scientific temper of mind, which is cautious, tentative and piecemeal, over the mysticism of religion. Science does not imagine that it knows the whole truth, or that even its best knowledge is wholly true. It is this humility which will allow it to triumph over the arrogance of dogma.
> Comments
Johanan Raatz on Nov 24, 2008 at 02:41 PM:
While dogmatism is not rational I would like to point out that we have an even worse form of irrationality in society -namely sophistry. The trouble with sophistry is that it likes to masquerade as rationality and is thus harder to spot. It then likes to pretend that reason backs up its claims that their are no absolute truths, that morality is relative, and that no society is any better than any other society. Organized religion can act as a strong bulwark against this danger. Read some Leo Strauss on this or perhaps some of Plato's later works, and you'll get at what I'm talking about.
In practice you will find that dogmatism actually performs a vital role in society in combating sophistry which is the other form irrationalism in society. Now I have heard a lot of ranting by anti-theists about how bad religion is. However in reality I think it is sophistry that is more dangerous. Sophistic political ideologies such as communism and Nazism not to mention the less obviously dangerous ideologies that maske behind political correctness are probably in reality far more dangerous than overly dogmatic forms of religion.
As for you comparison of us to Western Europe they may be doing fine now, but they are completely unsustainable. This is largely due to the prevalence or the sophist form of irrationalism over the dogmatic form of irrationalism. It is lead to abberant views on morality which have in turn led to unsustainable social trends. You may not see it's effects yet but as a result of this Western Europe will likely undergo serious political turmoil in the next couple of decades.
"Israel is dangerous because it is a rogue state"
Correction: Israel has never been classified as a rogue state.
Johanan Raatz on Nov 24, 2008 at 02:47 PM:
"Meanwhile, the countries which pose the greatest threat to world peace are the highly religious fundamentalist countries, such as the United States, Israel and Pakistan."
Actually the US is necessary to maintain world peace. Hegemonic stability theory dictates that if their is not one superpower enforcing peace hundreds of factions, will start to vy for that power instead creating much turmoil in the process.
"The church also prevented the development of medicine (as it still does with stem cell research), and, to this day, it rejects the theory of evolution in favor of its primitive mythology called “Creationism.”"
I agree with you about evolution however you have to understand the ironic truth that people who are irrational about reality are often rational about morality and vice versa. I don't like irrationality but I would prefer people who have sensible views on morality but not on reality versus the alternative.
For example it is known that many people who believe in creationism also are pro-life. As such though their creationism is wrong it is preferable to allow creationism to flourish in society so as to help politically reign in anti-fetal rights policies.
Steven B. Redd on Nov 25, 2008 at 09:02 AM:
I find it rather ironic that exactly one day after Mr. Flashinski's article appeared wherein he extols the secular nature of Scandinavian governments and gleefully points out how they "lead the world in living standards in terms of health care, education, economic equality, social welfare programs, etc.," we learn that Iceland, ranked number 1 according to the UN Human Development Index, has suffered a complete financial collapse and thousands of Icelanders are rioting in the capital city of Rekjavik demanding the resignation of the prime minister and the central bank governor. Nice timing.
Jeff Flashinski on Nov 26, 2008 at 03:18 PM:
It's not ironic. I never said Iceland had a better chance of withstanding a depression then the U.S. The argument is that Iceland takes much better care of its citizens having far less resources than the U.S. Don't worry about Iceland though, it will persevere. It will remain the best place to live in the world.
Jeff Flashinski on Nov 26, 2008 at 07:46 PM:
P.S. I don't do anything gleefully.
Joshua McCracken on Nov 27, 2008 at 05:48 PM:
Coming from a guy who once said "I think it’s time to stop questioning authority and instead have the audacity to assert some", I don't think you are the best person to talk to about whether or not religious fundamentalism is a good thing. Please bear in mind that this attitude of not questioning authority is WHY we are stuck in Iraq.
Jeff, congratulations on a well written article. the Iceland comment earlier was a bit of a low blow, I thought, and you are right that just because a country takes good care of its citizens does not mean that it is somehow cut off from what is happening in the rest of the world. At this point it is impossible for any nation to exist as an island in and of itself; everyone relies on somebody else. The fact of the matter is that everyone also worships differently, and the fact that we can't find ways past our disagreements on such matters is a big part of why we are incapable of working together for a common goal. The current situation in the Middle East is the direct result of religious intolerance. Religion enforces a belief in the minds of men that they are superior because they are confident in their faith, and this leads to war. No, war will not end forever if we simply stop making such a big deal of religion; and I would like anyone reading this to remember that religion promotes power (we all know how powerful fear is, especially fear of what happens after death), and everyone who gains power fears losing it. The last person in the world I would trust with my life is someone with strong faith in any organized religion.
Johanan Raatz on Nov 29, 2008 at 08:21 AM:
Did you read the context the quote? I was arguing that assertion was required at some point were we to not lose all norms and values. The argument I gave in the article provided a perfect basis for judging whether or not religious fundamentalism is a good thing.
As for Iraq were stuck there not because we haven't questioned why it's being done, but rather how it's being done. You can find a more efficient way to do something without question the authority behind that thing.