02.28.07
Religion, Darwinism, and violence
Psychology and Religion, from Frontal Cortex
Over at Mixing Memory, Chris has an excellent post complicating the recent psychological study which demonstrated that reading selected passages from the Bible about retributive violence makes people more aggressive. He reminds us that other studies have found the opposite effect. Chris’ sobering conclusion is exactly right
These ’scientific’ studies of religion in the Dawkins mindset seem to me wrongly posed, and mostly a concealed mudslinging in the name of science. To indict the whole of religion in the name of a limited experimental potshot methodology doesn’t hack it.
We need to consider religion in the full scope of world history and not confuse Gandhi with that whole. After all Gandhi walked around with a copy of the Gita, a book explicitly trying to induce a violent reaction in someone who is reluctant. Gandhi must have been trying to sink this book, as he played politician to modern India.
Having been a conscientious objector, I would advise not misunderstanding my point.
I am not defending ‘religious violence’, but those who are so indignant at such religious violence have to ask themselves if they themselve support violence in the state with the right to war?
There is a lot to think about here, but my point is simply that New Age ‘let’s hug’ definitions of religion don’t define ancient religion, whose close association with the state makes it difficult to challenge their violence without challenging violence in the state itself. What is the place of religion in world history?
Let’s see these critics state their position on pacifism.
There are many other considerations here, but the point is simply that the current Darwinist/Dawkins assault on religion has a botched methodology and a very narrow definition of religion and is really just false indignation as an excuse for mudslinging.
Meanwhile they themselves are injecting violence into history with the concealed Social Darwinism of Darwin’s bungled theory.