In defense of uncertainty

This month TIME essayist Charles Krauthammer wrote a piece called “In Defense of Certainty.” Well, I’m certain that Krauthammer is wrong. He thinks that it’s entirely appropriate to publicly advocate political views founded on religious belief.

Actually, it’s entirely inappropriate to do this. Last year I wrote about why religious values have no place in politics, arguing that “you can’t debate with someone who doesn’t have a defensible reason for why they believe what they do. You can’t debate with someone who responds to a reasoned argument with ‘Because the Bible says so’ or ‘Jesus condemns sinners.’”

Religious belief is a conversation stopper. That’s why it is so injurious to political discourse. People who are absolutely certain that they are right aren’t interested in listening. All they want to do is talk. Preach. Proselytize. Pontificate. Since they can’t offer rational reasons for their political positions—faith isn’t rational—the simple question “Why?” is viewed as an attack.

More accurately, questions which follow the religious believer’s answer to the initial “Why?” are considered to be unseemly. For example, I ask a True Believer “Why do you think that gays shouldn’t be able to marry?” I am told, “Because homosexuality is a sin.” And that supposedly settles the matter.

Now, from my point of view that response doesn’t end our conversation; it’s just the beginning. I want to ask follow-up questions. Lots of them. “What do you mean by sin?” “Who decides what is sinful?” “How can you be sure that what you think is a sin, really is?” There are all kinds of directions our conversation could go. Naturally I’d be asked questions too and would have to defend my own answers.

Krauthammer completely misses the point when he says, “Instead of arguing the merits of any issue, secularists are trying to win the argument by default on the grounds that the other side displays unhealthy certainty or, even worse, unhealthy religiosity.” No, it is just the opposite: the religious believers are the ones trying to win political arguments by default, not the secularists.

When someone tells me, “I’m certain,” and he really means it, that’s the end of our discussion. I’m not going to waste my time trying to engage him in an open debate when his mind isn’t open. If he believes that everything written in the Bible or some other holy book is true, and no matter what facts I bring up he quotes scripture to me, I’ll walk away from this one-sided conversation. He doesn’t want to talk with me; he wants to preach to me.

Krauthammer sings the praises of moral certainty. Yet moral certainty only is a virtue when there are good reasons for holding an ethical position. Blind, thoughtless, unquestioning moral certainty is more likely to be a vice than a virtue, because ethics requires a delicate sensitive touch—not a ham-fisted slam on the table and the cry “Believe!”

I’ve never belonged to a genuine fundamentalist religion, thank God. But over the decades I’ve associated with many people who have treated the utterances of a guru in a fundamentalist fashion. That is, they accepted as gospel what the guru said even when it didn’t make sense. Now, I’ve got no problem with this display of blind faith when the supposed gospel truth is purely spiritual with no political implications.

However, every time I read this passage in “Quest for Light,” a book containing extracts from letters written by an Indian guru, Charan Singh, I’m reminded of how simple-minded fundamentalism is as likely to be found in Eastern mysticism as in Western religion. The guru wrote:

Please remember that anything that is against Nature is always improper and inadvisable. Nature has created the two sexes for the continuation of the species and for the satisfaction of the sex instinct within proper limits. If we go against it, it means we are doing something unnatural of which the laws of Nature do not approve. Homosexuality is contrary to all laws of Nature and no decent society approves it. The act is humiliating and degenerating not only in the eyes of others, but also in the eyes of those who are involved…There are no habits which we cannot break if we have the will and determination to do so.

There are many untruths and irrational conclusions in that paragraph. It makes no sense. Yet because the guru said those words, many (if not most) of his disciples took them seriously. Their desire for spiritual certainty led them to accept without question statements that should have been met with an emphatic, “What?!” Every sentence in the quotation above begs for deep questioning. And then, in my opinion, rejection.

I understand the appeal of certainty. I’ve fallen into the trap of the True Believer myself. I once thought that questioning the pronouncements of a guru would be detrimental to my spiritual progress, no matter how ridiculous those statements were when viewed in the lights of reason, compassion, and scientific facts.

Now, I’ve concluded that uncertainty is an always-open door. Uncertainty allows us to escape from the confines of rigid beliefs that have no basis in reality.

I’ve come to believe in the power of don’t know. When in doubt, doubt.

Comments

[Randy]

It's interesting that the RS masters have initiated many homosexuals. They must not think it's too bad.

[ET]

Yes I agree with you Brian, uncertainty is healthful.

This world is as it is, not as we see it. We each see this world differently. We each have a view point depending upon our own personal life experiences, and we see things colored by that experience - thus we are all biased. We each know things from our own point of view, or our own perspective or paradigm.

However, it is not necessarily bad for each us to see things differently because each person has a unique and valuable point of view. However, people who are certain limit themselves to their own narrow viewpoint. They eliminate any possibility of learning something new or seeing something differently and thus they cannot grow or even develop synergy in problem solving or other creative ventures. Many complex problems are only solved through teamwork, or synergetic interactions of team members with varied experiences.

People who are certain listen with the intent to reply rather than to understand the other person’s point of view. They are certain because if they listen to the other person then they risk being wrong or having to change their own mind and that can be painful to their ego. Thus they cannot communicate or have a dialogue. In order to communicate we have to listen as well as transmit, that is the definition of communication. People who are certain are stuck on transmitting and simply have a monologue instead of a dialogue – very boring.

In my view the root problem is that we believe that our own view is the only correct one. If we can learn to listen to understand and suspend our judgments and beliefs we have the potential to learn something, and to change our own mind. Thus the cornerstone of my personal philosophy is uncertainty, that is I believe everything and nothing, and see myself as climbing a ladder of understanding rather than being stuck on the rung of certainty.

[Steve]

Brian. Oh MY GOD. I am so glad to have found your blog. As one of those "many homosexuals" initiated by a guru, I have to tell you that when first initiated at age 23, my life was fine for six months, then many, many years of pure hell. It was like thinking "oh sure, after being gay since I was 12 I can just be straight because... well, I'm supposed to." Not only did I create all kinds of chaos in my own life as a result, but I am sure I whipped all kinds of nasty karma dating women and making them all unhappy in the end. Some day I will write a book about it all.

My life began to change when I went to Beas about a decade ago. As I sat sobbing in my chair in front of the guru, someone asked a question, and then, completely unrelated to that question came a response to the question that had been on my mind for years. You see, I'm too freaked out to even ask the guru a question because I'm terrified that I'll be immediately judged and zapped like Aaron's sons were when they offered Alien Fire!

Anyway, so, as I'm sitting there crying, the guru looks directly at me -- across the room from the questioner --and says "There are exceptions to every rule." And ever since then I've been working to let it go. I got married to my partner in the U.S. and in Canada (my mind still looking for possible loopholes). I think certain things are said a certain way and we can't understand it or explain it.

I think the important thing to remember is that nothing is "black and white" which is how fundamentalism expresses itself. We can't be either "holy" or "unpure" when in reality everything is just shades of gray. In Judaism they have all those purification rites and they believed all this stuff about when people were pure and when they were impure. I think that must have something to do with our own primitive minds trying to classify everything. I believe what's more important is just relaxing, and trying to love everyone for who they are, and not taking everything so seriously.

I like to think this experience makes me a less judgmental than I would have been otherwise. I try to focus on being a loving, forgiving, and understanding person. I try to laugh off any problems. Maybe that's the lesson in it for me.

Of course, when my sister turned out to be a lesbian -- well, maybe this was a lesson for my parents too! I often think this has helped them learn unconditional love. It certainly has, but it was a long and difficult road for them. "We are all just struggling souls," n'est pas?

[Netemara]

It is not the sexual orientation but the sex that counts. By that I mean it is simply a matter of the centres and their division between the higher and the lower ones.

The masters cannot tell you that it does not matter who you use to gratify those desires but that regardless of who or what you use you will have to adress the karma that comes with using the lower centers to reach the goal.

It does not matter. I could not follow that celibate vow either when I first go on the path because I was only 26 or so. But that did not bother me I did the best I could and finally after ten years on the path was able to be celibate. I am straight and female, but again since we are both sexes and have changed sexes millions of times in one sense we are all HOMOSEXUALs when we practice sex. We don't know really what we are. We are simply satisfying some desire until we no longer desire it... May not happen in one life.

Finally, I did want to conquer that vow and did but it took a long time. I know that straight or not you must pay for living, breathing, eating and sexing in this life on this plane....no one escapes that...no one gay or straight....

Netemara

[Octavian]

I guess i don't see how a couple of guys getting it on could be considered natural. I guess i need to think and analysis deeply so i can rationalize that one instead of just looking and knowing automatically like a child would do. No I think i'll just stick w/ simple observation.

[Brian]

Octavian, homosexuality is entirely natural because it is common in the non-human animal world, and no one would say that animals consciously choose to practice unnatural sex.

See a post on this subject on my other weblog:
http://hinessight.blogs.com/hinessight/2005/06/humor_and_facts.html

Here's a selection from that post:

The National Geographic article goes on to say, “So how far can we go in using animals to help us understand human homosexuality? Robin Dunbar is a professor of evolutionary psychology at the University of Liverpool, England. ‘The bottom line is that anything that happens in other primates, and particularly other apes, is likely to have strong evolutionary continuity with what happens in humans,’ he said.”

Children don't know automatically. They believe in lots of things that aren't true. So I'd suggest that in this area you rely more on science and less on "knowing automatically like a child would do."

[Jay Lou]

Brian,

I don't want to be rude to you. But if you can't say anything good about something then don't say it at all. This path is to be experienced on our own. It doesn't always work with everyone, even the Masters say that. Even though things might be going good for you but at the time of your death you will see what you have turned your back on. This mind of ours makes us doubt a lot and we have to control it. I'm just saying this to you to please don't say anything about the path, if you can't say anything good then don't say anything at all. Respect the path for what it is, even if you think its wrong and gives and didn't work for you. I think you have lost faith and don't know what you have lost. I just hope one day you understand and find what you are looking for.

[Benito Darkman]

Jay Lou remarks and Jermaine replies:

"But if you can't say anything good about something then don't say it at all."

--Why not? He can say whatever he likes. Moral cliche's don't apply here.

"It doesn't always work with everyone, even the Masters say that."

--Then how can you be sure it will work for you?

"Even though things might be going good for you but at the time of your death you will see what you have turned your back on."

--Have you ever died? How do you know? How do you know what the master knows or doesn't know?

"This mind of ours makes us doubt a lot and we have to control it."

--I think a controlled mind doesn't think for itself and blindly follows dogma and unsubstantiated belief systems.

"I'm just saying this to you to please don't say anything about the path, if you can't say anything good then don't say anything at all."

--You said it again. Is it better to go through life not questioning anything just because it may shatter some deluded person's illusions?

"Respect the path for what it is"

--Why pretend respect for something you have no respect for?

"I think you have lost faith and don't know what you have lost."

--Maybe he knows what he lost and has more faith in what he has gained.

"I just hope one day you understand and find what you are looking for."

--And maybe he would say the same to you?

Hola Benito! No hay lugar!

[Low Rider]

Jay Lou, you're waaay behind the times. You responded to a blog-post that is two and a half years old. Not only that, but your comment does not relate to the original post, or any of the comments whic preceded it.

"I don't want to be rude to you. But if you can't say anything good about something then don't say it at all."

--Then you should practice what you preach and "don't say at all". And according to you, what is "good" or not good?

"This path is to be experienced on our own. It doesn't always work with everyone, even the Masters say that."

--Masters? Who are these "Masters"? Where are they? What do they know? I really hope you are not as naive as your ideas are. And if "It doesn't always work", then what is the point?

"at the time of your death you will see what you have turned your back on."

--And what would that be? Please enlighten us still living ones.

"This mind of ours makes us doubt a lot and we have to control it."

--You have a "mind" you say? Its not very apparent. Can you show it to us? What are you so doubtful about? Who is the "we" that you say has to "control", and control what?

"I'm just saying this to you to please don't say anything about the path,"

-- You say "don't say anything about the path"? Then why are your "masters" saying anything about the path"? And what "path"? Path to what?

"if you can't say anything good then don't say anything"

-- What is "good"? What is bad? Please explain.

"Respect the path for what it is"

-- "what it is" you say? Then do tell us, what IS it?

"I think you have lost faith and don't know what you have lost."

-- "Lost faith" in what? "Don't know" what? You don't make sense. What exactly are you talking about?

"I just hope one day you understand and find what you are looking for."

-- What doesn't Brian "understand"? ... that you do understand? And what is Brian "looking for"? You seem to imply that you understand and know, so what is it that Brian and others "don't understand and are "looking for"?

[McSkepticalson]

I thought I was the only one who felt this way about that passage in Quest For Light, I was similarly shocked, although only later on as initially I accepted it given the source, just like how you did...

Refreshing stuff! Thank you.

[Cheryl]

Can someone tell me what letter or page in the quest for light book this excerpt about homosexuality is please? I can’t seem to find it.