In an earlier post, commenter Zensci argues that religious ideals should be maintained:
What I’m trying to relate is that religion strives for an ideal that humans seem to constantly fall short of. However, despite our inability to do so it doesn’t mean we should just give up and not try to live up to such lofty ideals.
What are these lofty ideals? Zensci lists ” love, good deeds, intellectual pursuit, being grateful for every moment of life etc etc.”
Zensci, please understand that these ideals do not belong exclusively either to religion generally or to specific religions.
Those of us who criticize religion and individual religions do not–by and large–advocate doing away with love, good deeds, and so forth. Just the opposite, in fact.
Incidentally, many who criticize religion and individual religions are actually religious believers themselves. I am not. I think religion and individual religions should fade into permanent cultural irrelevancy. I think the ideals that you ascribe to religion are more achievable individually and socially without religion. As support for this statement, I point you to Steven Pinker, The Better Angels of Our Nature.
What’s wrong with religion(s)? The problem, as I see it, is the metaphysics. Some folks see love, hope, and charity as uniquely religious by-products. They aren’t, and they are not the substance of religion; metaphysics is. That is, the bottom-line foundational element of religion is a theory of what exists. In many religions, what exists is a God who created people, and various angels, demons and other supernatural creatures. Some of these creatures live in an other-dimensional realm of utopic bliss or eternal punishment.
The problem with this metaphysics is not only that there’s no evidence supporting it, but that it’s historically been used as a psychological sledgehammer against believers and non-believers alike. Consider the standard Christian teaching that people are “naturally sinful.” This is an abhorrent dogma that can only emerge from a metaphysics of God. Same with the teaching that Jewish people have a claim to land in present-day Israel/Palestine. The metaphysics of God is the deep underlier of that one, too.
We can talk much more effectively and productively about morality and politics by jettisoning the whole idea that there’s a God somewhere we need to please, or follow, or accept as an authority. And of course, since God doesn’t exist, we know that it’s not really God’s orthodoxy that people push; it’s their own cultural and idiosyncratic values. It’s their own designs for power, status, and wealth. The holiness is just an act to divert attention away from who these people are and what they are trying to accomplish.
So: keep the ideals, lose the religion.
