Theophobia

[Canadian_watcher]

Those ignorant atheists
I'm not sure there's a human being on earth, Terry Eagleton's family members included, who will agree with everything in "Reason, Faith, and Revolution" -- Eagleton seems delighted with the idea that he will outrage both the secular left and the religious right -- but it repeatedly challenges us to reconsider terms and ideas most of us take for granted most of the time. ...
...
Biologist Stephen Jay Gould's famous pronouncement that science and religion were "non-overlapping Magisteria" has sometimes been viewed as a cop-out, or as a polite attempt to say that the former is real and the latter imaginary.

It is odd that whenever a scientist turns metaphysical (and it happens often) people without faith want to label them or apologize for them - explain the 'lapse' away.

...In one of Eagleton's most ingenious turns of phrase, he describes contemporary Christian fundamentalists as faithless, because they specifically lack the kind of performative faith mentioned above. ... [b]fundamentalists have become the mirror image of atheists. Unsatisfied with the transcendent and unknowable nature of the Almighty, they've stuffed and jammed him into a dinosaur diorama.

I agree and I do think that ethnocentricity is partly to blame for the problem described in the OP. (US ethnocentricity, that is.)

[sunny]

In general, I find people on the left to be much more spiritual than those on the right, if by spiritual you mean non-materialistic rather than religious.

That's where we went wrong. The left has too much wishy-washy, namby-pamby, hippy-dippy bullshit, should have kept focused on the important business of improving material conditions for normal people.

A certain segment of the left, yes. For certain other segments, particularly the religious left, not ignoring the plight of the poor is a prerequisite of the faith.

[vanlose kid]

It's pretty amusing to hear Chomsky speak of the dangers of State worship.
Since Chomsky takes it on faith that the State had nothing whatsoever to do with the assassination of JFK, the first Catholic president, to say nothing of the assassination of MLK.

dude, i recognize your misgivings re Chomsky, but i don't think your description of his position is entirely accurate. NC works mainly with FOIA documents and works hard at it. in that sense the state had nothing to do with JFK's assassination. that's the whole premise behind PDS's concept of the deep state. nothing of that type is written down.

*

[barracuda]

i was about to address that in re the OP. one could place the OP in the context of right-wing extremism, as barracuda does, and it dismiss it at the outset.

I don't dismiss it - in the context of Mac's post and your own, I can see reasons to consider some of the points. But there's no reason to ignore, either, that

- such thought exists on a continuum,

- that thoughtful, nuanced and - dare I say it - intellectual approaches to the issue of faith as put forth by Noam Chomsky and Rabbi Michael Lerner or Terry Eagleton are the tiny exception in American political life and thought, and

- that the religious right in this country has been one of the most damaging political and intellectual phenomena of the last twenty-five years or more.

But my real objection to this idea is, as I've said, that I feel it is being used to unfairly smear the membership of the board as widely prejudicial, a position I simply find to be unfounded.

[vanlose kid]

^^

agreed. with the exception of the last bit re C_w. i don't think she was making that accusation, if indeed she was making any accusation. i think she just wanted to take up a subject she found worth discussion in it's own right, and the choice of OP bears that out. although i do think it's poorly or maybe too hastily written.

*

[Canadian_watcher]

VK is correct - I wasn't making an accusation.

I observed directly that people had knee-jerk negative responses when the topic of faith was introduced, and that these responses generally came in the form of comments which suggest the inability of someone of faith to think critically.

edit: replaced the phrase "centered around" with the coloured text, above.

[barracuda]

Oh. I thought you were saying there was a prejudice here on this board against people who are spiritual. If not, it was an honest mistake.

[IanEye]

dude, i recognize your misgivings re Chomsky, but i don't think your description of his position is entirely accurate.
*

fair enough.


but there are people who take the same research approach as Chomsky and apply it to JFK research. and they deserve the same respect for the amount of faith they take when they enter those deep murky waters. i don't always get that impression from him, in terms of respect and disses and such.

[DrVolin]

Interesting disclarities in this thread. Atheism is not the absence of faith. Respect for a set of ethical precepts does not require it, nor does participation in or subjection to a religious hierarchy. Faith is belief in the improvable. Acceptance of the possibility of an unobserved reality is not faith. Denial of its existence clearly is. Evidence based critical thinking cannot lead to faith, nor can it lead away from it. By definition, faith allows of no evidence to fuel critical thought. Critical thinking and faith inhabit different realms. They can and do exist at the same time in the same individual, but I hesitate to say that they coexist.

[The Consul]

In other words: I believe god exists but I think it's bullshit.

[Canadian_watcher]

Atheism is not the absence of faith.

Did someone here make that statement? I hope I didn't.

Respect for a set of ethical precepts does not require it, nor does participation in or subjection to a religious hierarchy.

Does not require faith? Or athiesm. Or maybe the absence of faith? There's a bit of disclarity there.

Faith is belief in the improvable.

I agree with that.. and I think it is belief in that which cannot be proved, too. (couldn't resist)

Acceptance of the possibility of an unobserved reality is not faith. Denial of its existence clearly is.

Are you saying that denying the existence of an unobservable reality = faith? Or that denial of the existenceof the possibility of an unobservable reality = faith?

Evidence based critical thinking cannot lead to faith, nor can it lead away from it.

I disagree based on the accounts of many scientists who have made statements indicating that, after years of work in their fields, they felt it foolhardy not to believe in something beyond their powers of observation. And, anecdotally, I used to call myself an atheist before I learned as much as I have learned to this point.

By definition, faith allows of no evidence to fuel critical thought.

On the contrary, I believe that every person of faith would love to find a way to prove what they believe in. Should one actually succeed, then, I suppose you are technically correct: it wouldn't be faith any more.

Critical thinking and faith inhabit different realms. They can and do exist at the same time in the same individual, but I hesitate to say that they coexist.

I think, therefore I am. I think critically, therefore I am divided in two - unless I have no faith and then I can be whole again?

[DrVolin]

In other words: I believe god exists but I think it's bullshit.

Rather: I don't believe god exists, and I don't believe god doesn't exist.

I feel I should be writing about the story of Thomas in this thread. Maybe later I will.

[wintler2]

A certain segment of the left, yes. For certain other segments, particularly the religious left, not ignoring the plight of the poor is a prerequisite of the faith.

Yes, there are some inspiring examples. One of the very few people i really admire is Catholic Worker Ciaron O'Reilly, who i met and worked with on the S11 blockade of Crown Casino. Some people, on their day, transmute the very air.

[wintler2]

the culture-war noises here are drowning the signal.
is there such a thing as a discarnate intelligence?
could there be?
could such a thing have had a role in our history?
what if there are people who suspect that this is the case?
what about people who reject the premise?
these are the questions.

imho: yes; yes; inevitably; good; kill them all/joke.

Those are excellent questions, but i worry that ignoring the culture war wont make it go away.

Wouldn't it be wonderful to formulate a faith-friendly way of participating in critical thinking about deep politics. I'm pretty sure i'm not helping so i'll shut up for a bit, y'all have the answer done by close of business EST, okay?

[82_28]

In other words: I believe god exists but I think it's bullshit.

LOL. Not making fun of anyone at all. But that did make me laugh out loud or in the aging but modern internet parlance "spew coffee all over my screen".