Religion isn't horrible, just horribly misguided

While on a dog walk yesterday, I ran into a neighbor who I don't talk to very often. He started off our conversation in an appealing fashion:

"I read your blog regularly." Nice! But then he said, "Being a confirmed atheist, it's a bit too kind to religion for me. I prefer PZ Myers' blog."

Well, I told him that I also enjoy Pharyngula. Every day I take a look at Myers' posts that attack religion and support science. Hopefully without sounding too defensive, I did some defending of my own attitude toward spirituality.

"Yes, I'm not as rabid toward religion as Myers is. Partly that's because I used to be a true believer, and now I'm not, so I can understand the mindset of religious people. I mean, it's tough for me to say that blind faith is utterly ridiculous when I can remember how easily I embraced it."

I told my neighbor that when I got married to my second wife, Laurel, she would regularly ask me how I could believe such-and-such (that my guru was God in human form, for example).

I didn't have an answer for her that made much sense.

Yet that didn't affect my commitment to the Radha Soami Satsang Beas teachings. I wasn't ready to release my attachment to the organization, and no amount of outside questioning was going to penetrate the illusory answers I'd embraced inside my head.

So I told my neighbor this was one reason I don't write as aggressively about the ridiculousness of religion as PZ Myers does.

People who are beginning to question their religious beliefs usually are turned off (or at least unaffected) by strong attacks on their faith. Similarly, an alcoholic isn't going to turn sober simply by someone screaming at him, "Drinking is ruining your life!"

My neighbor and I did agree on this: There is plenty of mystery left in the cosmos, notwithstanding the advances of science.

Recognizing how little we know about the essence of life, consciousness, and existence, a primal sense of awe is an authentic "spiritual" awareness (I don't like that word -- spiritual -- very much any more, but it's hard to come up with a good substitute).

Awe, of course, doesn't require religion.

As I told my neighbor, it only takes looking up at the star-filled sky on a cold, clear night to feel how right the world is, no matter how wrong it seems, so often.

I understand why passionate atheists and agnostics are so anti-religion. Reality is much better than make-believe, which is what religions offer.

The neighbor and I agreed that "whatever turns you on" is a fine guide to getting along. If someone is happier by believing he or she has been saved through the grace of God, Jesus, or a guru, that's fine.

However, there shouldn't be any attempt to coerce other people to share that blind faith. And "I feel," "I believe," "I hope," and similar expressions of uncertainty should be used when talking about a religion's teachings rather than "I know."

That's what makes religiosity so misguided: the unfounded assumption that an ultimate truth about reality has been revealed to the true believer. No, it hasn't. Without evidence all we can say is "no one knows."

You. Me. Scientists. Priests. Gurus. Saints. Sages. Everyone is in the dark about the answers to the Big Questions of the Cosmos.

Of course, you're free to disagree. Just don't ask me to agree with you without supplying some darn good reasons.

Comments

[suzanne]

Bravo Brian!!Everything is right with the world, especially in nature, when it vibrates with an energy that we just can't even begin to understand. Our understanding of how it all works is so limited, we are just playing around with ideas and thoughts about how to comprehend it all rather than just enjoying what is.

[do-we-really-have-an-ID]

bottom line is you still just a baby

spiritually speaking that is,

and PZ Myers whoever the hell he is is probably even more so.

Grow up a little and stop whining

[George]

yep i agree, problem is some of the mystical traditions do claim 'to know'.

The religious claim 'to believe' and science claims 'to know only that which is suopported by evidence'.

but some of the mystic traditons claims to know the ultimate, based on what, sweet fanny fa.

[Rain]

You said it well. My complaint about religion, beyond proselytizing, is when it dictates political actions. We see a lot of it in this country and even more in some other nations. Religion can demand people give up quality living now for a specific and unfounded promise of something better someday somewhere. That's where it seems to me it can damage even unbelievers and we do have a right to fight against it. It doesn't do any good though to have every moment devoted to trying to get someone else to think. Thinking appears to be a choice and too many are choosing to not do it :(

[Alex]

"do-we-really-have-an-ID":

Agreed.

Brain and PZ Myers are still just babies spiritually.

We all are.

You have spoken the truth.

Just like saying Brain and PZ Myersis and all of us are human beings.

So have you say a thing?

[CTK]

I love being in the dark and having no answers about the cosmos. The usefulness is from the emptiness.

Keep up the good blogging.

[tucson]

"You. Me. Scientists. Priests. Gurus. Saints. Sages. Everyone is in the dark about the answers to the Big Questions of the Cosmos."

--Everyone?...maybe.

Perhaps from a relative viewpoint certain questions can't be answered. Perhaps from a non-relative viewpoint no questions could be asked?

[Blogger Brian]

tucson, good point. When I wrote that line, I recall thinking along the same lines as you. Namely, that being in the dark assumes there is a light -- a contrast.

But it could well be that our Big Questions are what cause us to consider that there's a light to be turned on. That is, the Big Questions create an assumed darkness, which we feel has to be banished by the light of some answers.

I'd still argue, though, that no one can be absolutely sure about this whole Q and A thing. So who knows if there are really Big Questions that can be answered, or if this is an illusion? It still seems that we're in the dark, even if there isn't any darkness.

Probably... I admit that it's possible someone, somewhere, sometime grasped the ultimate secrets of the cosmos. Unfortunately, they weren't able to communicate this convincingly to the rest of us.

[huckleberry]

you want them to convince you in which language or by which test tube experiment?

Its your perception, receptivity and readiness to know which is at fault, not the lesson or the tutor.

[Rain]

A friend of mine said maybe the reason I ask these kinds of questions is wanting security. I answered that knowing might not provide security. It might be the answer would be very scary but it's knowing that I would like regardless of where it leads. To me it's like fearing a bad man in your closet. I'd rather look and see if someone is there than to worry about it. Unfortunately where it comes to questions of the cosmos, of a god or not, there may be no way to open the door. It doesn't mean I'll give up trying but my methods have changed and I no longer expect it through any religion.

[elizabeth w]

My thought processes travel in the existential mode. And still do despite an experience at Dera (RSSB) some years ago. I went there out of curiosity, the need to explore "everything" : after arriving all I wanted was to leave, the place bored me, the discourses seemed absurd and meaningless. Also I myself was in a depressed frame of mind (due to personal problems). I couldn't change airline bookings so was "forced" to stay. And then something happened - with Charan. In the blink of an eye (so it seemed) I was elevated into a state of consciousness that can only be described as pure bliss (a word I dislike but can think of no other), a state where everything was perfect, where no questions or answers existed. My previous condition was unbelievable. I thought at that time that everyone went through this so discussed it with no-one (there was nothing to discuss anyway). I wandered around in intoxication - this state last about six weeks, long after I reached home. It slowly diminished or everyday life would have been impossible. Alright, I'll agree the cause, as all materialists would say, was a change in the function of the chemistry of the brain. There is actually much, much more I could say about the experiences encountered whilst in this state but refrain as it would sound - in the current climate of disbelief - quite delusional. All I retain, quite involuntarily, is my love for Charan and also my sense of wonder at the extraordinary feats the brain can accomplish.
Elizabeth W

[Rain]

I had an experience somewhat like Elizabeth described but with Christianity and many years ago now. Ecstasy is all I can use as a word to describe it and it lasted off and on for months or maybe longer. I could bring it back when I took the time to let it be. I think many 'believers' in many faiths experience it but don't really know what it is. Mostly we cannot live there but we can remember what it was like. I would not call it delusional but I also do not know it proves a god's existence.

[e]

I am not liking the word "spiritual" much, either. It is too closely intermingled with "religious". "Primal sense of awe" is more accurate but cumbersome. Anyway. I can relate entirely to seeing the night sky, or cloud formations or any number of natural settings and events and having a sense of wonder and awe. Life seems so simply perfect in those moments. They are "shalom".
"I know" automatically segregates and expresses arrogance and intolerance for anything else. I don't know why Christians cannot understand how hypocritical that is.

[Dogribb]

Never knew Charan never spoke to him, never met him.All I can say is that I had an attachment to my own projections.Brought on by my own needs and wishful thinking.No doubt stimulated by reading and listening to the discourses and sadly believing the stories of bliss ninnies both foreign and domestic.