I coukd join the fray but I'll hold off for now. I have a big seminar tomorrow.
Is the question really about God? Or about using ontology - that is, the collective understanding about why we exist and what it means to be human - as a means of securing political power? Look at China under Mao, Pol Pot in Cambodia... they were among the few officially atheistic societies that have existed, and they have resulted in mass suffering all the same. The reason there are more examples of theistic societies gone wrong than atheistic ones, is that there have been more theistic societies, period. It's a numbers game. And by the way, although Buddhism in the sense of its official doctrines is a peaceful religion (as Christianity is), a quick wikipedia search will show you how governments have tried to enforce it using violence: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence . Much like Christian and Islamic governments did. Those governments just happen to be a long way away from much of the English-speaking world, culturally and geographically, so maybe we don't hear about it much. And we mustn't forget that there are massive commercial interests in buddhism as imported into the West - you only need to look at the prevalence of yoga, and how easy it is to get your hands on a Buddha statue on the highstreet. It's not in the interests of the massive industry behind this one-size-fits-all pluralistic 'McBuddhism' to draw attention to the violence done in the name of Buddha on his continents of origin, where Buddha is culturally and politically fundamental and bound to a majoritarian belief system very different from ours. The East is also on the fringes of the Western traditional-liberal ideological conflict, rather than at the centre, in Western Europe and the US, where most of the attention is. As Eastern religions and ideologies are in some ways more an ally to liberal values han an enemy, it is not in the interests of cultural and educational institutions to draw attention to the crimes committed in the name of, say, Karl Marx, as it would be to draw attention to the crimes of the Catholic Church.
In sum, I think the moment you have an idea about the truth of the fundamental questions of human existence is, and try to enforce it, there is conflict. Should we stop trying to find out the truth about the universe we live in? Then science and knowledge would atrophy. No, people will always strive to know the truth, and to act on it, and to encourage others to act on it. That's not going to change if God is left out the picture. And they will fight over it eventually, because they are humans. I actually think it would be fairer to say that only divine intervention could *stop* humans being humans!
Do you think a world without religion would be better
← View full post
I coukd join the fray but I'll hold off for now. I have a big seminar tomorrow.
Is the question really about God? Or about using ontology - that is, the collective understanding about why we exist and what it means to be human - as a means of securing political power? Look at China under Mao, Pol Pot in Cambodia... they were among the few officially atheistic societies that have existed, and they have resulted in mass suffering all the same. The reason there are more examples of theistic societies gone wrong than atheistic ones, is that there have been more theistic societies, period. It's a numbers game. And by the way, although Buddhism in the sense of its official doctrines is a peaceful religion (as Christianity is), a quick wikipedia search will show you how governments have tried to enforce it using violence: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence . Much like Christian and Islamic governments did. Those governments just happen to be a long way away from much of the English-speaking world, culturally and geographically, so maybe we don't hear about it much. And we mustn't forget that there are massive commercial interests in buddhism as imported into the West - you only need to look at the prevalence of yoga, and how easy it is to get your hands on a Buddha statue on the highstreet. It's not in the interests of the massive industry behind this one-size-fits-all pluralistic 'McBuddhism' to draw attention to the violence done in the name of Buddha on his continents of origin, where Buddha is culturally and politically fundamental and bound to a majoritarian belief system very different from ours. The East is also on the fringes of the Western traditional-liberal ideological conflict, rather than at the centre, in Western Europe and the US, where most of the attention is. As Eastern religions and ideologies are in some ways more an ally to liberal values han an enemy, it is not in the interests of cultural and educational institutions to draw attention to the crimes committed in the name of, say, Karl Marx, as it would be to draw attention to the crimes of the Catholic Church.
In sum, I think the moment you have an idea about the truth of the fundamental questions of human existence is, and try to enforce it, there is conflict. Should we stop trying to find out the truth about the universe we live in? Then science and knowledge would atrophy. No, people will always strive to know the truth, and to act on it, and to encourage others to act on it. That's not going to change if God is left out the picture. And they will fight over it eventually, because they are humans. I actually think it would be fairer to say that only divine intervention could *stop* humans being humans!