| | Kurt wrote, There is great opportunity as well as danger in this. If religion can be replaced with something like a coherent philosophy like Objectivism, then it works and can be a good opportunity. In the past, when it was replaced with collectivist ideology such as Communism and Fascism, it was far worse and led to mass murder never before seen on Earth. If post-modernism is all that is offered as the alternative, or communism, is it any wonder people cling to religion? Unless and until Objectivism or even something else as a reasoned alternative is offered, I am concerned about dismantling religion even as flawed as it is. There is nothing sacrosanct about religion. Look at Islamic fundamentalism. Is that better than Communism, Nazism or Fascism? No! It may, in fact, be worse. Is Christianity in its present state better? Yes, but by what criterion? By the criterion of rationality. You can only judge a particular religion as better or worse than another if you already have a standard of judgment based on the principles of Objectivism. Since religion is based on faith, and faith is the antipode of reason, there can be no argument for preserving religion on the grounds that it is some kind of bulwark against totalitarianism, which can itself arise from religious premises (e.g., Islamofascism).
When you say, "Is it any wonder that people cling to religion?", what you are really saying is, "Is it any wonder that people cling to the rational elements of a particular religion?" No, but recognize that what they are clinging to is an implicitly rational philosophy, even if they haven't identified it as such. You can't justify preserving a religion simply on the grounds that it contains some rational ideas, since it doesn't follow that to abandon the religion is throw the baby out with the baptismal water.
- Bill
(Edited by William Dwyer
on 11/21, 9:21am)
|
|
