[lbo-talk] Rationality of the Masses

[Jeffrey Fisher]

> 
> Religion is not to be understood as failed science.  It is identity
> politics.  It is the creation of personal and collective identities -- and
> the two necessarily go together -- that allow people to feel like their
> lives have meaning which is a fundamental component of happiness.  They are
> not deluded, any more than people who like to live in master/slave
> relationships are deluded.  Both ways of life look completely absurd to most
> practitioners of the other.  But if they don't infringe on you personally --
> in the strongest sense of personally, which doesn't include offending your
> tender sensibilities through public display -- then you should respect their
> right to be happy and treat their symbols with a respect that comes out of
> that.  That's the American way.  And that's the way we secular pagans should
> look at religion in America.  There is nothing wrong with a belief in God or
> the in Devil, there is nothing wrong with being a Christian or a Wiccan. The
> only thing that is wrong is when you impose your beliefs on others and stand
> between them and their god-given pursuit of happiness.  

thanks, michael. outstanding.

i only want to call attention to the paragraph above, which i think is
critically important. not only does it include the rough beginnings of
a workable definition of religion, but that definition is
socio-cultural. it's as if everyone's forgotten peter berger, already.
do leftists not read peter berger? why not?

but the real point i want to make is not to confuse the processes and
systems of identity andmeaning construction with "identity *politics*.
not the same thing, and if we keep the difference clear, i believe
that answers many (not all) of kelley's concerns in her reply.

thanks,
j