[lbo-talk] Atheism

Jon Johanning jjohanning at igc.org
Tue Dec 23 16:11:57 PST 2003


On Tuesday, December 23, 2003, at 12:35 PM, Kenneth MacKendrick wrote:


> In short, for you to say that religions hold on to their creeds like
> scientific assumptions is false for most religious traditions (even if
> numerically Christianity and Islam are able to claim a great deal of
> adherents). There are no "emotionally satisfying creeds" in Shinto.
> This
> leaves "religion" in Japan unexplained, or, non-religious (ouch).

Well, I was thinking primarily of the U.S. scene, where the most popular religions, of course, are still the "religions of the book." But I was using the term "creed" loosely -- not in the sense of a formal, written document. Practicers of Shinto and other such religions certainly believe that certain things are true -- the existence of the "kami," the efficacy of various prayers, chants, spells, or the like -- and to that extent they have systems of assumptions about what is true or false about the world, just as scientists do.

You acknowledge as much when you write:


> For instance: The Hindu festival known as Divali is celebrated by the
> Jains,
> but for reasons different from those of the Hindu tradition. Jains
> believe
> that on this day Mahavira (enlightened one) reached nirvana.

Etc. So the Jains *believe that* something is true. That's what I meant by beliefs. Generally, these beliefs are not supported by what scientists would call evidence (where is the "evidence" that Mahavira reached nirvana, or that there is a nirvana for him to reach?), but are passionately believed because they satisfy certain emotional needs. (In the case of the Jains, as you describe, them, the need for wealth -- or at least, the need to escape the horrors of poverty.) As long as they find the beliefs satisfy the needs, they continue to believe that they are true; if the beliefs became unsatisfying for some reason or other, their faith would "die."

Science of course proceeds very differently, as we both know. I was not arguing in favor of the Tylor/Fraser thesis -- far from it. I was arguing against the thesis, very popular in some circles, that "science is just another religion, because it 'rests on faith' also."

Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ Had I been present at the Creation, I would have given some useful hints for the better ordering of the universe. -- Attr. to Alfonso the Wise, King of Castile



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list