06.15.10
The god obsessed, theist, and atheist
Like it or not, since the 19th century, religion has lost most of its authority as the go-to place for our enduring questions, yearnings, stories and role models.
Note the way this statement starts with a ‘god’ issue, then speaks of religion in general. I think the authority of religion has increased since the last century as the New Age movement, with many confusions to be sure, has filled the void left by Xtianity’s decline (if that decline is real) and shown how the traditions of, e.g. Buddhism, point to something deeper than what scientists and the sideshow Dawkins cult of village atheists can manage.
(I have been critical of that renewed prestige and authority of religion, btw, cf The Gurdjieff Con.) The inability of scientism to deal with religion, except the infantile Xtian brand, has made it lose authority.
Time to wake up.
This article seems to be still another rhetorical tactic to ply atheism at Alternet. It gets to be annoying finally. Being subjected to these stategies generates mistrust, not agreement.
The problem here is the ‘god’ obsession, theist, or atheist. They resemble each other.
A study of the issue in terms of Kantian critiques of metaphysics, here the antinomies of the beginning in time, etc, might suggest the way that disbelieving in god obsesses in the same way as belief.
This article attempts to take a new line to the question, but ends in the same old Darwinian junk from de Waals on evolution and ethics. If there is one thing that will buttress religion it is the attempt to Darwinize the void left by athesits attacks on ethics.
God is not irrelevant to those obsessed with him.
I posted a comment to this article:
We have known since the nineteenth century that traditional religion was in decline, and now it is still in decline. Whatever the case, it is indeed true that traditions are passing away. The confusion arises over what is to replace them, and the useless junk offered by the New Atheists has given atheism a bad name. Further, as this article indicates, junk evolutionism propped up a sound science is spreading a totally distorted view of the nature of man and his spiritual potential. The issue is the concern that the passing of religion is leading to something worse, a watered down scientism and reductionist Darwinism led by second rate figures like Dawkins and his cult.
Those who think god irrelevant should consider the richness and depth of the atheist religions such as Buddhism, and look with some alarm at the sordid Darwinian brand whose failures are already clear from the historical record, despite massive denial by the cult followers.
Replacing religion with Dawkins style pseudoscience is an invitation to future disaster. Surely something more intelligent is possible.