"The Path Between Pseudo-Spirituality and Pseudo-Science"

[Htom Sirveaux]

I am often asked what will replace organized religion. The answer, I believe, is nothing and everything. Nothing need replace its ludicrous and divisive doctrines—such as the idea that Jesus will return to earth and hurl unbelievers into a lake of fire, or that death in defense of Islam is the highest good. These are terrifying and debasing fictions. But what about love, compassion, moral goodness, and self-transcendence? Many people still imagine that religion is the true repository of these virtues. To change this, we must begin to think about the full range of human experience in a way that is as free of dogma, cultural prejudice, and wishful thinking as the best science already is. That is the subject of my next book, Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion.

(snip)

Few scientists and philosophers have developed strong skills of introspection—in fact, many doubt that such abilities even exist. Conversely, many of the greatest contemplatives know nothing about science. I know brilliant scientists and philosophers who seem unable to make the most basic discriminations about their own moment to moment experience; and I have known contemplatives who spent decades meditating in silence who probably thought the earth was flat. And yet there is a connection between scientific fact and spiritual wisdom, and it is more direct than most people suppose.

I have been waiting for more than a decade to write Waking Up. Long before I saw any reason to criticize religion (The End of Faith, Letter to a Christian Nation), or to connect moral and scientific truths (The Moral Landscape, Free Will), I was interested in the nature of human consciousness and the possibility of spiritual experience. In Waking Up, I do my best to show that a certain form of spirituality is integral to understanding the nature of our minds. (For those of you who recoil at every use of the term “spirituality,” I recommend that you read a previous post.)

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-path-between-pseudo-spirituality-and-pseudo-science

I'm intrigued, and I will consider reading it, and the responses to it, when it comes out.

[dballance]

1. It is rather unfortunate that we have not come to the point of shedding mythology.

I wish I could say a respect other peoples' beliefs in supernatural gods. However I do not.

Such beliefs have, for centuries, led people to commit the most heinous crimes. All under the unshakable belief that their god requires them to do horrible acts in his name. That their god forgives them for those acts of murder and destruction because they performed them in his name and with his blessing.

If there were actually a god he'd save us from his believers.

[Htom Sirveaux]

2. How do you explain the believers who do not fit that description?

Also what do you imagine when you imagine God saving us from his believers?

[dballance]

5. Quite simply, any believers who allow the horrible crimes...

If one passively sits by and simply "tut-tuts" the crimes perpetrated by the extremists, the crimes perpetrated by those few extremists, then they are accomplices to those extremists. That is how I explain them.

What I imagine when I say god would save us from his believers is a world where people no longer go to war based on mythological beliefs. Where young men do not fly airplanes into buildings in the name of their god, where men do not murder doctors who provide vital health services to women in the name of their god.

That is the world I'd like to imagine.

[cbayer]

7. What would you consider an active response, such that

someone could avoid being an accomplice to those extremists.

And is not anyone who sits by and simply "tut-tuts" and accomplice in your argument, be they a believer or not?

With or without religion, people will still go to war and people will still engage in acts of terrorism. Whether the underlying reason is religion or religion is just used as a cover, it will still happen.

The world I imagine would be in which religious and non-religious people recognize each other and work together to prevent these things from happening instead of scapegoating each other for the ills of the world.

[dballance]

8. First of all, simply speaking out against those crimes.

Secondly, taking the extremists into custody and prosecuting them for their crimes.

After WWII we had War Crimes trials. We prosecuted the Nazi's (who were Christians BTW) for their attempt at genocide of many peoples, not just the Jewish people. They notoriously tried to exterminate the Polish, the Roma and others as well.

We had War Crimes trials at Nuremberg and we punished the perpetrators for their crimes.

I must disagree with your vision of the world. A world in which people still believe in some mythology is still a world of ignorance. It is incompatible to believe in myths and at the same time be part of an educated society.

I doubt you'd argue that we should still respect the beliefs of people who wish to worship the Greek and Roman gods and goddesses. I believe you would find their misguided mythology rather ridiculous. After all, who actually believes in Zeus these days?

It is a basic tenant of religious people to single out the godly from the godless. There is an "us vs. them" built into all religions. The religious cannot simply co-exist with those of us who are not religious. They must judge us as less than them because we do not share their blind faith to some supernatural being. That is what their religion teaches.

That has led to the most horrible persecutions and the wiping out of societies. The Roman Catholic Church single-handedly wiped out much of the history, language and culture of Central America. Lost forever in the fires of "holiness" were the works of culture, art and the history of the indigenous peoples.

The religious people have burned texts, tortured people and done unspeakable acts in the name of their gods. That is not a history worth preserving nor respecting.

[cbayer]

9. Lots of religious people spoke out against the crimes.

In general, if they live through it, those extremists are taken into custom and prosecuted for their crimes.

You say it's mythology an debased on ignorance, but you have no evidence to support this. It's beliefs, held by many and held through most of recorded history, that are based on faith. There is no correlation with education, as some of the most educated humans on earth are also religious.

The reason that some of the ancient mythologies were abandoned is because the persona of their deities were created to explain the unexplainable. Once there were other explanations, the personifications of deities changed, but there was still belief based on faith.

There is no doubt that religion has played a very significant role in some of the worst horrors this world has ever known. There is also no doubt that some other horrors were not religiously driven. Humans being humans will follow these paths whether they are lit by religion or not. Wiping out religion will do nothing to reduce the atrocities on this earth, imo.

In fact, it might eliminate a lot of the humanitarian work that is done during and after these atrocities and reduce the number of organizations that are most active in human rights, civil liberties and justice for the most marginalized.

[dballance]

10. Mythology, is by definition, the belief system based upon faith in supernatural beings.

You say it's mythology an debased [sic] on ignorance, but you have no evidence to support this. It's beliefs, held by many and held through most of recorded history, that are based on faith. There is no correlation with education, as some of the most educated humans on earth are also religious.

What more evidence do you need? Do you believe in Islam, Christianity, or the Jewish faith of the Torah?

Beliefs held by many and held through recorded history used to tell us the Earth was the center of the universe and the Sun and stars revolved around the Earth. Beliefs held by many used to tell us that the Earth was flat and if one went too far one would fall off.

Beliefs are not facts. They are just beliefs.

Facts are immutable. It is a fact that the Earth and the other planets revolve around the Sun. It is a fact that what people used to attribute to demons possessing people and causing seizures is now identified as Epilepsy. A medical condition not at all caused by daemons.

I used to believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. As I grew older I gave up those ridiculous beliefs because I realized my parents were Santa and that my parents put a couple of coins under my pillow for my tooth.

Isn't it time for us to all realize we've been believing in fairy tales and myths and get past them?

[cbayer]

11. I don't believe in any of those things, but I respect those that do

and advocate for their right to believe.

Supernatural doesn't mean false, it just means unexplained based on current knowledge. Again, you have no proof that most religious beliefs are false, and for those that you do have proof, you certainly have the right to strenuously object.

You are right, beliefs are not facts. They can not be proven nor disproven for the most part. Facts are facts. They are good things but they are not everything.

No, it isn't time for everyone to go to the place you found. It is your place and not suited for everyone else. Many people do not choose to believe, they just do.

Crusades to end the world of religion often stem from prejudice, if not downright bigotry. Those who think they have found the way are evangelists, whether that way is religion or no religion.

[dballance]

12. I do not respect people who belive in myths.

If, as an adult, I espoused belief in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny I suspect you'd be happy to lock me up for being crazy.

Why, exactly, is it okay to believe in some other supernatural being? Why is that okay and not considered crazy? Just because millions of people believe doesn't make it true.

I'm pretty sure there are millions of kids who believe in Santa and yet they are all wrong.

[Fix The Stupid]

13. This question has been asked here before.

You will never get a straight answer.

[cbayer]

15. Really? What would you consider a straight answer?

[cbayer]

14. Ok, don't respect them.

I don't respect people that conflate widely held religious beliefs with things like Santa Claus, the tough fairy and the easter bunny. I think it's a sign of a very weak argument.

And if you did believe in those things, I would not lock you up as crazy unless those beliefs were significantly impairing your ability to care for yourself or placing others in danger. But that's just me.

Do you think all religious believers suffer from some kind of psychiatric disorder? Millions of people believing it does not make it true, but religious belief isn't about being true.

[Warren Stupidity]

16. Right - because you cannot provide a coherent argument why there is any difference

other than "lots of people believe in their various gods". And you routinely ridicule *some* supernatural beliefs, without any acknowledgement that in doing so you are utterly hypocritical.

[dballance]

20. A weak argument? You're making me laugh.

I guess you don't realize that your arguments in favor of religion pretty much amount to "because I said so" and "trust me."

I can see no weaker argument than the one that says one must just have "faith." No science, no proof. Just have faith that some mythological being exists who watches your every move day in and day out. That the same mythical being will punish you with an eternity of agony if you don't worship him.

If religious belief is not about being true then what exactly is it about?

[cbayer]

23. I'm am happy to provide you with laughter.

My arguments represent my POV. Whether you find any substance or value in them is not my problem.

I make no argument that one must have faith, only that religious belief is based on faith. It is, as you say, a belief based on no science and no proof. Some people have it, some people don't. Certainly no one here is saying that you must have it.

I don't think it's necessarily a choice, either. Could you choose to be a believer? I doubt it.

So I object to the wholesale derisive dismissal of those that believe and have faith.

If some people believe it is true, it is true for them. That doesn't make it true for you or for me and, frankly, unless it impacts on us or others, it's none of our business.

[Fix The Stupid]

27. Lets' put it this way.

You ask:

"Do you think all religious believers suffer from some kind of psychiatric disorder?"

Turn this question to this:

" Do you think all Santa/Zeus/Orion/Unicorn believers suffer from some kind of psychiatric disorder?"

Imagine if the adults around you carried on their lives believing in say, creationism, 6000 yr. old earth, Zeus, etc, etc.?

I would say they were, at best, delusional, at worst, mentally ill.

Wouldn't you? If the society around you believed that there was a real Santa, wouldn't you as a rational person reject this thinking? What would you think of an adult, in his/her 50's who believed in Santa and the miracles he does on Christmas eve?

I would love to hear an honest reply to this question:

"What would you think of an adult, in his/her 50's who believed in Santa and the miracles he does on Christmas eve?"

[cbayer]

29. But you didn't answer my question.

Do you think all religious believers suffer from some sort of psychiatric disorder?

Are you using delusional in the colloquial sense or in the psychiatric sense?

Are you credentialed to diagnose people with either delusions or mental illness?

If the society around me believed there was a real santa, I may or may not reject that. I may not share their belief, but in the vast majority held it to be true, I certainly wouldn't say they were all mentally ill.

If I met an individual who believed that and no one else around them believed it, I would have to evaluate further to determine whether this were a symptom of illness or just a simple belief. If it did no harm, did not impair the person's ability to care for themselves and placed no one in danger, I would most likely just leave it alone.

Is that honest enough for you?

[cheapdate]

21. I don't respect people who don't respect people who believe in myths.

They lack imagination and often come across as petty and peevish.

[cbayer]

30. and intrusive and controlling.

[Htom Sirveaux]

22. Nuremberg came after a long and costly war.

Is that what you think should happen? We should declare war on American religious extremists?
-
As it happens, I do think we should respect the beliefs of those who worship the Greek and Roman gods. At least enough to assume the possibility that what they are doing makes sense to them, and we should try to understand what they think before labeling them as "ridiculous" and dismissing them. Learning to see from other points of view is a valuable skill worth practicing, and certainly its only fair if you expect those of other viewpoints to listen to your views respectfully before judging.

Plus, if you still end up disagreeing in the end, your arguments will be much stronger because you'll be arguing against what they actually believe, not a misunderstood image in your head of what they believe. And you'll be more convincing because you'll have gotten to know them as people rather than as faceless holders of unusual beliefs. The personal connection makes a big difference.

[cheapdate]

3. Goddess worship was about the most consistent and continuous

feature of prehistoric European society for more than 30,000 years, until the westward migration of patriarchal, Indo-Aryan cultures began roughly 5,000 years ago. Artifacts of the goddess -- fertile, often pregnant -- are found across all of Europe dating as far back as 40,000 years or more. Freyja, the Norse goddess of fertility and abundance, probably descends from them. I'll take the old gods.

[Htom Sirveaux]

4. Are you a practicing Pagan?

Or were you just saying that the old gods are alright in your book compared to Yahweh?

[cheapdate]

18. I'm not formally associated with any coherent religious group.

Coincidentally, my wife informed me of a Pagan gathering this coming weekend which we plan to attend. My religious/spiritual beliefs are vaguely indeterminate. I've always believed as animists do that trees, rocks, animals, clouds, mountains, etc., have a "spiritual essence" for lack of a better term. Yahweh, the thunder-mountain god of the desert, has never had any attraction for me.

[Htom Sirveaux]

24. That's cool.

I hope you guys have a great time at the gathering! My church (UU) has winter solstice services every year, and for the first time ever we had a summer solstice service this year. All have been very well done.

[cbayer]

6. Fascinating. He is basically proposing a bridge between the secular

and the religious and calling it spirituality.

Here again is why I think the theism/atheism dichotomy is too confining and dogmatic.

He is going to receive a lot of blowback from certain parts of the atheist community, but is probably going to be embraced by those who are "spiritual but not religious".

I probably won't read it, as I have a strong dislike of books like this. It's just more pop psychology that generally just says, "Here is the answer I found for myself and it will probably work for you!".

But then again, I might.

[Warren Stupidity]

17. The rejection of spiritualism, and its advocacy, are nothing new for atheists.

It is an old debate.

[AtheistCrusader]

19. I do not possess a spirit, and therefore cannot be spiritual. Next question.

[cbayer]

25. Do you think others might possess a spirit or have you pretty much ruled that out

for everyone and everything?

[AtheistCrusader]

26. I see no credible evidence of any such thing.

[cbayer]

28. Does that mean that you find no reason to believe it or

do you hold the position that it is not possible or something else?

[AtheistCrusader]

31. I have already answered this question.