In Defence of Belief
Laiste 26 comments
I’ve seen a lot of religion bashing going on lately and quite frankly I’ve had enough of it. Its time to defend the importance of belief. Personally, I am not religious but I do consider myself deeply spiritual and I think that belief in something bigger then oneself is very important. Why? Because I have experienced it.
For all the claims that those who are religious are stupid there is one thing that those making the claims forget- far more people on this planet are religious then not. Calling all religious people stupid is not only arrogant and misguided it is also claiming that the minority is right and the majority is wrong. Religion and spirituality is part of who we are. From our cave man days to right now and on into the future.
Of course idiotic things have been done in the name of religion. And yes, there are those who exploit its power over the masses for their own personal gain, but these are exceptions rather then the rule. For the vast majority of people belief in a higher power, in something that connects them to the wonderful vast cosmos we find ourselves in, is not only a comfort it’s a necessity. Science can’t provide all the answers about who we are and why we are here. Religion can. It may not be the truth but it is a truth. It is something that connects us to other human beings and it provides something all important. It provides a sense of belonging. A sense that there are others who think like you. A sense that you're not all alone.
The major attack on religion seems to be that it has caused all the wars in history and all the strife. I don’t believe this is the case. Those who start wars don’t start them for religion, they start them for resources, power and territory. Religion just happens to be the single most convenient excuse. Anyone with half a brain knows the war in Iraq is about oil, but we bought the excuse that it was about security and doing the right thing. Religious wars were the same. They were justified by religion because religion is the one thing that everybody could agree on- it was (and is) the common denominator. Without religion those wars would still have happened, after all there’s still wars happening now. They are just justified differently.
Of all the attacks on religion the one that puzzles me most is the single minded focus on the minority cases. The few bad eggs. Why is this? If we were to reverse the situation we should be focusing on the few bad scientists and the cases where science has been used malignantly. Like the scientists who created the gas chambers of the Holocaust, or the scientists who invented napalm. Religion doesn’t have exclusive rights to the moral high ground, but neither does science. Bad things can happen under any guise- religion is not to blame for all the worlds ills. In fact, without religion the world would be a pretty horrible place.
Belief in an immortal soul is the single biggest deterrent to crime and bad behaviour. Without that belief far more people would commit crimes. Belief that reward and punishment doesn’t end with life is far more effective then the death penalty. If death was the worst that could happen then there’s a lot more reason for those in high emotional states to simply do what they wanted to then take their own lives. If you're not afraid of dying then there’s nothing to stop you.
But even more then a deterrent, religion is an incentive. When you belong to a community that you feel cares about you, when people need you then you have far more reason to go out there and actually help, actually be part of the world around you. Organisations like the Salvation Army and St Vincent de Paul save the lives of countless people, they make a difference regardless of whether or not you believe what they do. By dismissing all religion as stupid, you are dismissing the tireless work of millions of volunteers who actually make the world a better place, for no better reason then they believe in the work they are doing. They believe they are doing God’s work. It really doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks about their motives- for them they have all the reason they need. And for that I honour them and their beliefs, even if those beliefs aren’t mine.
In some ways I feel a little like the person who claims they saw a UFO. I know that you may not believe me, but I know what I have experienced. I have experienced things that cannot be explained by science. I have felt a deep connection to Mother Earth and felt nourished by that connection. I know that there’s no earthly way that science could measure my experiences or test them in a double blind experiment. But that doesn’t make my experiences any less real to me. I’m sure countless other people who are religious or spiritual have felt the same thing. For atheists to dismiss all these experiences is akin to claiming gravity isn’t real because Newton hasn’t discovered the Law yet. Religious experiences are real to the people who experience them, even if they seem as unbelievable to outsiders as UFO claims.
Religion may not have all the answers, but it has enough of them for the majority of people on this planet. And its not going to go away simply because some people want to stamp their feet and throw tantrums about how stupid it is. Face the fact that for most people, religion isn’t stupid. It’s what most people use as an inner compass, a guide for the perplexing thing we call life. I’m not asking any atheists to come over to my point of view. I’m simply asking for there to be a little more open mindedness going on and a little less bashing.
Jake
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 06:57 AM
Sage words Laiste, as usual.
Much like you, I have my own notions which are totally based on personal experience though I hold no belief in any sort of higher power.
The points you raise in defense of religion are certainly valid, however I don't think that science is the antitheis of religion and as such, is not really relivant in the debate. If anything, science is sincerely restricted by religious prejudice and misinterpretation.
The onus is on religion to proove its own worth, if it stands up to debate, then it is worthy. Thus far, it falls well short. As always, I enjoy a good debate.
Jim
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 09:00 AMVery good article, I enjoyed reading it. Though I agree with Jake that science and religion are not opposites of each other. Rather I like to think of religion as the basis of science. Religion gives us answers for the world around us, so we use science to test out own theories on the truth. It seems both need to be flexible to the other, and not so rigid.
Jake
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 09:06 AM
...in response to this comment
by Jim.
I almost disagree, I think in the past, where any natural event was unexplainable and therefore likely to create hysteria umong the populace, the supernatural (gods, religion etc) was used to circumvent such a response, and I'm sure it was effective.
Now as we progress, religion is unable to do this and is unable to find a common ground on which to exert its self, and is, as such, looking its relivance in the main.
I'm sure, in the future, it will loose its dogmatism and stive for a more spiritual (and inevitably less harmful) stance. Something to the order of, 'this is what we think makes up the universe, now go out and discover it for yourself, happy to help if you like, but otherwise it is a solitary persuit', instead of, 'the truth is in a book written 2500 years before the industrial evolution'.
Janine
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 09:41 AM
A great post Laiset. May I ask, do you allow for the possibility that there may not be a God?
Also, if you have experienced things that have not been explained by science, does that automatically mean they must have been caused by a higher power? Do you think that's a very smart assumption? Could you allow for the possibility - and more likely reason - that science just hasn't yet explained it?
Thanks.
Cat
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 10:36 AM
Laiste,
Great article!
Thank You!
Great article, and I agree with the point that religion is the excuse, not the real reason some bad things happened (The Cathars were totally safe with the Catholics in France until they built too much of a stronghold in southern france, and then the Catholics proclaimed them heretics and went down there and killed them all). If you ever get the chance to go to Peyrepertuse, do it.
But, enough killing and stealing has been done in the name of religion that it is two-faced, like stealing indiginous children from families in Australia and the America's (north and south) up until as recently as 30 years ago and then raising them on the other side of the country as 'orphans' is reprehensible, and purely to indoctrinate more people into their religion.
People have the right to believe in a higher power, and it can be very beneficial to them and the community in alot of cases, but I do think the onus should be more upon an individual's belief in being a good person, than in following the rules of a book (which in the Bible's case is so full of inconsistencies and self-defeating passages.... just watch 'Penn & Teller Bullshit' for the Bible episode for starters).
My wife (Mandyleigh) isn't religious, but she is spiritual, and I respect her beliefs, even if I don't share them. Neither of us impress our beliefs on our children though. They can decide for themselves when they are much older (and less likely to just believe whatever we say, as children are pre-programmed to do) what they think of the whole life-after-death thing.
Just be Excellent to each other. That's my religion.
"Just be Excellent to each other."
Where would we be without Bill and Ted?
Laiste
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 02:41 PM
I'm sorry if I gave the impression that science and religion were opposites, I don't think they are, nor do I think they are mutually exclusive, it was just the first example that came to mind. Forgive but i was a quite cranky when I wrote the article.
Janine, I'm sorry but I find your post a little insulting. As I said, I am not religious, so i don't really believe in God as say the Christians do. But I do beleive there is a lot more out there then science either has explained or ever can explain. In the end it doesn't matter to me what you think of my spiritual experiences, all that matters is what they mean to me. I don't need science to tell me who I am and what my place in the big scheme of things is.
Thanks for all the lovely compliments. :-)
mini-mel
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 02:53 PM
...in response to this comment
by Mikey.
im much in the same boat as laiste.. more so a spiritual person than anything.. i went to sunday school as a child and did bible studies in primary schools. so learnt all the hoo haa that is involved (well some of it) in christianity.. i was also briefly involved in CEGS.
but as i grew older, and sometimes wiser.. i viewed the world from a different eye.. possibly with some cynicism, but definitely more tainted that that i was before.
ive had the 'bible bashers' knock on the door at all times of the day and night.. one of my favourite times was when one poor sod asked me if i knew how 'the devil' came to be.. my answer was "well, there are two sides to a coin.. god cannot possibly be all love and fluff, so that is his bad side" as you can imagine, they werent too happy with that explanation, and went into the sordid tale of how it was an angel chucked out of heaven for being a rotter.. or words to that effect. some ppl just cant handle a joke i guess.
but in words brought to our attention by mikey of bill and ted "just be excellent to each other" is pretty much the guidelines ppl should be living by
just remember mikey.. when alice cooper is about
"we're not worthy"
"Belief in an immortal soul is the single biggest deterrent to crime and bad behaviour. Without that belief far more people would commit crimes. Belief that reward and punishment doesn’t end with life is far more effective then the death penalty. If death was the worst that could happen then there’s a lot more reason for those in high emotional states to simply do what they wanted to then take their own lives. If you're not afraid of dying then there’s nothing to stop you."
While your article was interesting (although I have to disagree with most of it, despite me being highly spiritual), I really have to take exception to this paragraph. What you're basically saying is that we human beings are basically stupid and evil creatures that would do whatever they wanted if they didn't believe they could be punished even after death. Sorry, not only don't I buy it, but I find it insulting. Have you so little trust in your fellow human beings that you think they need to be treated like children at primary school, who are told that if they are not nice, the teacher will call their parents and they will be punished when they come home?
Many defenders of religion complain that a life without religion would be extremely cynical and meaningless. Sorry, but when I hear this kind of judgement on humanity (that humans cannot play nice with each other if they don't believe they can be punished for it after death), I cannot help but thinking that it's the religious view that is cynical and meaningless. What's the point of life if only a hypothesis is keeping you from killing your neighbour (I know I'm exaggerating. It's just an image to show you what I mean).
Frankly, only a very small minority of people don't value their own life (even in "high emotional states", whatever that may mean). Ethically speaking, "treat others as you would like to be treated" is a no-brainer, because everyone values their own life and likes to stay out of harm, and the best way (so far) has always been to not bring harm to others. Moreover, everyone knows instinctively that they cannot live on their own, and that they need others to survive. On the contrary, once this principle becomes linked to the belief in an immortal soul and a religion, it ceases to become axiomatic, and can become subject to caveats, especially in the definition of "others". Just have a sacred book or a spiritual leader say that those "others" don't include that kind or that other kind of people, and you've got permission to hurt those people. Without religion, it is much more difficult to rationally exclude some group or other.
I am not saying it's not happening: people don't always act rationally. However, religion far too often gives otherwise rational people a licence to act irrationally, which they wouldn't have if they didn't believe they were doing "God's work". As for all those organisations that help others in the name of a god or a religion, as I wrote in another comment, I don't believe they make up for all the ills religion has brought, and I don't believe those same people wouldn't do the same if there wasn't a religion to back them up. Do you really believe an organisation equivalent to the Salvation Army wouldn't exist if there was no religion? Do you really believe people are so self-centred and evil that they wouldn't act out of kindness if there wasn't the prospect of an after-life reward or the belief they were doing what God wanted them to do? If you do, that's a very selfish and cynical view of humanity, one that I just cannot agree to.
As I said, I am very spiritual. I too have witnessed events that just cannot be explained with today's science. I have witnessed and lived through events that would frankly be called paranormal! However, I don't ascribe those events to a higher power. I don't believe in a higher power (or at least not in one that is actively involved in our lives). I just wonder at the beauty of nature and the amount of things we still don't understand. No need to bring God or organised religion in there. If anything it just taints the picture.
Note that I didn't bring science into this. Science is not to compare with religion. True science is not a thing, it's a process: the process of trying to understand what makes the universe tick. Treat science as a body of inflexible rules, and what you have is no better than any other religion. Moreover, when I'm talking about religion, I am only referring to organised religion. Spirituality is not a problem. Personal beliefs are not a problem. What the problem is, is *unrestrained* belief, belief more important than anything else, the kind organised religions demand from their members. *That* is unhealthy, *that* is the kind of religion that causes so much ill in the world. Being spiritual can be an enrichment for your life. Thinking your beliefs are more important than anything else, especially fellow human beings, is not, and is harmful.
Laiste
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 04:24 PM
...in response to this comment
by Christophe.
I've never said that humans are basically stupid and evil and that only religion prevents them from being this. Not by a long shot. Humans are, well, human. Good, bad and ugly. For the majority of people on this planet religion provides a moral compass. You don't have to agree with that. But I don't understand why you think that religion can't be that moral compass for other people just because it isn't for you or any other atheist.
I think the only cynical views being expressed are the atheist ones. If anything religious views are far more full of hope (even if some of that hope is misguided) and understanding.
"High emotional states" are those crisis times in a persons life- walking in to find your partner in bed with someone else; seeing your child's murderer walk past you in a court room etc- times when a person needs to have a belief in something bigger then themselves to have a reason not to commit a crime.
Class poses a far greater barrier then any religion. Ask a wealthy man to give a homeless man a room in his house and a seat at his table and see what kind of response you get. Social barriers exist regardless of religion. Religion transcends those barriers.
With regards to spirituality being ok but not religion I'm at a loss. I really don't understand how you can dismiss the spiritual experience of billions of people just because they happen to have been had in a religious context. Some of the most spiritually understanding people I have ever had the pleasure to come into contact with have been priests and nuns.
Look, I'm not saying the religious way is the only way. Religious people can be just as annoying, wrong and arrogant as the next person, i am simply saying that religion is a valid spiritual path and it is important for the majority of people on this planet. But religious people are people too- good, and ugly.
"Thinking your beliefs are more important than anything else, especially fellow human beings, is not, and is harmful."
You said it. And the atheist voice is loud, strong and repetitive around here.
I appreciate your point of view and I have no intention of trying to change it. I just wanted to clear up some misconceptions about my point of view.
...in response to this comment
by Laiste.
"I've never said that humans are basically stupid and evil and that only religion prevents them from being this. Not by a long shot."
Sorry, but that's basically what the paragraph I quoted meant.
"Humans are, well, human. Good, bad and ugly. For the majority of people on this planet religion provides a moral compass. You don't have to agree with that. But I don't understand why you think that religion can't be that moral compass for other people just because it isn't for you or any other atheist."
Note that I don't consider myself an atheist. I am agnostic. I just don't think the existence or not of a higher power should have any influence on our lives. As for religion being a moral compass for other people, I consider that weak. Yes, I said it. It is weak that you would need such beliefs to have ethics. Moreover, I just don't believe that the majority of people actually *need* a religion to have a moral compass. I believe that most of them would do just as well without, and are only religious (or at least affiliated to a religion) because of tradition and inertia. I very much believe that even for many people who nominally pertain to some religion or other, religion actually plays little to no role in their lives. And I include people who regularly go to church as well.
"I think the only cynical views being expressed are the atheist ones. If anything religious views are far more full of hope (even if some of that hope is misguided) and understanding."
Then you have never really thought about it. Sorry, but believing that people can play nice with each other without resorting to a higher power or promise of eternal reward or punishment after death is a far more hopeful view of life than the opposite. Atheists as a rule are far more optimistic than religious people. They have to be, since they don't have a paradise to look forward to. The hope that religions bring (and I'm talking mostly about the religions of the Book, Judaism, Christianity and Islam) is a hope about what will happen after life, rather than what should happen during life. Atheism, cynicism and nihilism are different things.
""High emotional states" are those crisis times in a persons life- walking in to find your partner in bed with someone else; seeing your child's murderer walk past you in a court room etc- times when a person needs to have a belief in something bigger then themselves to have a reason not to commit a crime."
Do you realise that you take it as a given that one needs a "belief in something bigger then themselves" in those situations? You don't provide any reason, proof or evidence of this. It's just your opinion that you are trying to pass as fact. And because of that I just can't agree with this. Prove it to me. Prove to me that agnostic and atheist people are more inclined for revenge than religious ones. My bet is that you'll be hard to prove it. Atheists and agnostics have to think hard about their moral compass, because it is not offered to them on a silver plate. In my experience, much more crime and revenge has been done by religious people than by non-religious ones. Hey, many religions consider that even the correct (moral) way to act. It's not for nothing that Talion's law is part of the Bible.
"Class poses a far greater barrier then any religion. Ask a wealthy man to give a homeless man a room in his house and a seat at his table and see what kind of response you get. Social barriers exist regardless of religion. Religion transcends those barriers."
Historically, religion has usually justified those barriers, played with them, and eventually sided with the rich and strong. Look at the history of Christianity, from a belief shared by the left-overs of society to the most powerful religion on Earth. And when Christianity became the religion of the rich and strong, were the left-overs of society welcome among them? History says no.
"With regards to spirituality being ok but not religion I'm at a loss. I really don't understand how you can dismiss the spiritual experience of billions of people just because they happen to have been had in a religious context."
Do you really believe billions of people have such a spiritual experience? I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. And don't even speak about numbers of people affiliated to a church. That doesn't mean anything. I should know. I'm still considered affiliated to the Catholic Church despite being a non-believer, only because it is nigh impossible to cancel your membership of that particular club.
"Some of the most spiritually understanding people I have ever had the pleasure to come into contact with have been priests and nuns."
All people who take religion as a personal, rather than public experience (especially nuns). So you basically prove my point. I have no problem with religion as long as it is kept a private experience, as it should be (you can do it in groups even, as long as it remains a private affair between you all). I have a problem with religion trying to impose its views on others.
"Look, I'm not saying the religious way is the only way. Religious people can be just as annoying, wrong and arrogant as the next person, i am simply saying that religion is a valid spiritual path and it is important for the majority of people on this planet. But religious people are people too- good, and ugly."
Once again with "facts" you have no proof of. I just don't believe a majority of people think of religion as a spiritual path. For most of them, religion is just a tradition they follow because it's the thing their peers seem to want from them. It has no intrinsic value besides the fact that they feel they belong somewhere. And you don't need to believe in a higher power to create such a feeling.
"You said it. And the atheist voice is loud, strong and repetitive around here."
That's only because the religious voice is strong and loud and trying to get stronger everywhere and justifying things that are unjustifiable. I live in a country which is mostly agnostic. Until recently, religion was not something worth debating over. It was a private thing. Lately though, a minority of religious (Christian) people has been vehemently trying to impose its views on others, or at least made lots of noise to have its side heard and prevent others from telling their side. Only then did atheists start to complain about it. And you know what the reply of the religious people was? "Atheists are cynical, negative people that get too much air time. We are not heard enough"! You know what that is? That is a well-known rhetorical trick of the trade among politicians: accuse your adversary of the exact same thing you are guilty of doing. Sorry, but that trick does not work with me. I see it everyday on TV, I hear it everyday on the news. Who gets the most air time? Who gets the most to say? Always religious people. No wonder atheists look for alternative media to get their voice heard.
"I appreciate your point of view and I have no intention of trying to change it. I just wanted to clear up some misconceptions about my point of view."
I don't think I have any misconceptions about your point of view. And I am also not here to change it. I just think your point of view is based on misconceptions and invalid generalisations of your personal experience that I just wanted to point out.
And once again, I just want to insist on the fact that I am not against religion as a spiritual experience. I am against religion as a social construct trying to impose its view of life on people who don't necessarily believe in it. And don't try to pretend atheists and agnostics try to impose their view of life on religious people, because any unbiased viewer can see that they are just trying to survive to the push of religion on public life.
Rodney
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 11:44 PM
I am curious at the common ascertain that religion causes all wars. Seriously, name any recent wars caused by religion (genuinely caused by religion). Any at all.
WWI, no.
WWII, no.
Korea, no.
Vietname, no.
Falklands, no.
Iraq I, no.
Balkans conflict, no.
Afghanistan, no.
Iraq II, no.
Face it, people. Religion has nothing to do with the shitty acts humanity carries out on a day to day basis. Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Communist China, the Komer Rouge, etc, etc all prove pretty damn clearly you don't need religion to be a dickhead.
Laiste
Friday 22nd August 2008 | 04:49 AM
...in response to this comment
by Christophe.
"I don't think I have any misconceptions about your point of view. And I am also not here to change it. I just think your point of view is based on misconceptions and invalid generalisations of your personal experience that I just wanted to point out. "
Really? You think your point of view is right and mine is wrong because i have misunderstood my own life experiences? Whatever. I have no need to "prove" my opinion.
Peter K W
Monday 25th August 2008 | 09:02 AM"A man is accepted into a church for what he believes and he is turned out for what he knows"
Martin
Monday 25th August 2008 | 03:48 PMReligion is fast becoming a hiding round for extremist views waether it be Christian,Muslim or any other belif system.Its time people understood where religion started in what ever faith it is they follow and understand tha it was never meant as a tool to start conflict or single out those of opposing ideals its simply a list or book of ideas that some one or some group of individuals had a very long time ago and thought it may be a good idea to put pen to paper and share these ideas with others,at the end of the day these are simply morals or ideas that fit in with the currant state of ebents at the time they were thought up.The problems that i think people have with religion lately is that the text has been mistranslated over the centeries from generation to generation and unfortunatly this has given rise to more fanaticle supporters of theid belif system and try to turn back the clock and make an outdated set of ideas or morals that dont quite fit in with the currant way of life, (extremists). I personally feel that is why people are moving away from religion in general because there are far to many idiots thinking that they are better than the rest, it just embarreses those of a genuine faith to see people who are thought to have the same belifes and go a few steps too far.In closing religion is good for those who need it.for those who dont need it then they should stay out of religios debate and focus more on what they are doing in life?I pesonally dont need it nor want it,my morals are my own and wont be change to suite someone elses agenda.(stick that in ya pipe and smoke it)
I hereby say to the world that I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit, God, and Jesus Christ.
Laiste
Tuesday 26th August 2008 | 12:44 PM...in response to this comment by Friendo. And thats what right for you. But the point of the article is that just because it is right for you doesn't mean that its right for everybody. Religion and belief is right for a lot of people and those people are just as entitled to thier views as you are to yours.
Jake
Tuesday 26th August 2008 | 01:42 PM...in response to this comment by Friendo. What about mohammad, moses, noah, the invisible pink unicorn, the flying spaghetti monster, Darwin, satan, ischmael, Einstein, Zues, robin hood, the Illuminati, jerry falwell, Carl Sagan, Ra, Amen-ho-tep and Yeshua ben Youseph?
Gerald
Tuesday 26th August 2008 | 06:42 PM
sums it up really...
http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/41/ichatimage891131384xf6.jpg
Gong
Wednesday 27th August 2008 | 03:20 AM
...in response to this comment
by Gerald.
dude
its all symbolic. you can interpret it how you want to.
open your mind
Gong
Wednesday 27th August 2008 | 03:34 AM
i think that humans are just not smart enough to understand the universe, so they make up stuff just to satisfy their curiosity.
so this means that humans are also not smart enough to understand religion. it is too complex
imagine if there really was a god. how can you expect little humans to begin to comprehend what he tries to teach them?
on the other hand, any extra terrestrial civilisation that has visited our primitive world will seem godlike.
however you look at it, we are just too stupid at the moment. this crap will go on for some time
Martin
Wednesday 27th August 2008 | 03:39 PMOne thing i have noticed in life latley is that there are more people following than leading which is becoming a major problem.We belive what others tell us mor than ever before,the media plays a mjor part in it as well as the books we read, far too many people are under the impression that what they see, hear or read in the media is factual, all of it is open to the interpretation or mis-interpretation by the person who wrote it, heard it or saw it happen(its like playing chineese whispers whith the world and fraking it up)my point is that all books of faith started somewhere and where written by someone who interpreted it in thier eyes not always the way we all see it.
Joe Marco
Thursday 21st August 2008 | 06:57 AMOh but it's so much easier to tear something down than build it up. Trying to find that common ground where we all stand would be a good start.
It's never the idea that's bad, it's the people behind them and the way they pervert them for their own selfish gain that is bad, whether it be science or religion.