Skip to content
- Religion is a human construct.
- Religion means many things.
- Religion manifests on the level of the human mind, derived from innate presuppositions, intuitions and biases. In other words, the human mind naturally believes that the world is filled with supernatural agents and powers.
- Religion manifests on the level of the society. Tribes pray together, and their relationship to the common god binds them together.
- Religion manifests across history, evolving as a multi-dimensional phenomenon.
- Religion and its intersection with philosophy results in theology and the textual foci of “higher religoins.”
- Because of religion’s phenomenological scope it is nearly impossible to easily extricate it from other aspects of human affairs.
- Due to the fact that in many early modern societies, such as the American republic, there was a relative uniformity of religious practice but variations along fine details of orthodoxy, a separationist logic based on neutrality in terms of matters of belief was practicable.
- When the variation in religious traditions increases this makes such a minimalist separationist ideology impossible.
- Because of religion’s psychological grounding it is difficult to banish or extinguish without a great deal of exogenous pressure; e.g., the persecutions under Communism. And in situations where religion is supplanted, it is usually replaced by an ideology with quasi-religious characteristics.
- Atheists are often psychologically peculiar. In “officially atheist” cultures like North Korea there tends to emerge quasi-religious personality cults.
- The fact that a thorough skeptical scientific materialist Weltanschauung is going to be unappealing or unnatural for most of humanity has to be taken as a starting position or axiom about the nature of the universe.
- This implies that “militant atheism” is a vacuous and futile position.
- So from a stance of radical materialism the question is how to accommodate the instincts and inclinations of most humans; how to appease and compromise, establish common sets of norms.
a believer might agree with most of this, even the first point, since even if religion has a divine perfect origin it must be enacted by flawed humans.
where i draw a difference of opinion is the assertion that religious variation makes separation of church and state impossible (unless i misread your point). The US is arguably the most diverse nation on earth with respect to religious belief, and yet I think that we overall do separation better than anyone else (I think Turkey and France go too far, beyond separation towards outright repudiation. Theres no reason religion cant or shouldnt be in the public sphere, it just needs to not be favored in one incarnation or another. Let a thousand Commandment onuments bloom.)
as far as common sets of norms go, I think they already exist – derive from religion. Atheists share norms with people of faith, despite difference in belief, precisely because humans are inherently predisposed towards spirituality as you point out in bullets 3-5. Atheists need to simp;y acept that discourse will occur on the religious playing field and carve for themselves a space on it. There is no neutral ground.
Thanks your message has very much helped me:)
Thanks your message has very much helped me:)
Thanks your message has very much helped me:)
w8fze4u76bc8ibcq