While the author makes an articulate case against Jen’s article, I’m puzzled by two of his conclusions. Being content with what you see about you may be fine if you’re one of Canada’s winners, but it seems to me to be a recipe for economic stagnation as a life philosophy. Ask all the South American refugees dying on marches through the jungle in search of the American dream, if they were content with what they saw about them. Or you can sit in your nice warm car watching a homeless person on the street slowly freezing to death and be content or maybe engage in a bit of meditation while waiting for the light to change.
I spent a fair bit of time and effort exploring meditation as part of yoga training. I stopped because I eventually concluded that meditation had too many elements of navel gazing and egotism and frankly dangerous if you live in a dangerous world where you need to be aware of your physical surroundings. It’s a great vehicle for promoting book sales, pricey retreats, and endless sales of scents and mystical jewelry and crafts.
So IMHO, religion and theism are subject to abuse by demagogues and cult leaders and need to be taken with a grain of salt. But as a moral compass to a large majority of humankind there definitely is and will be there for some - and hopefully to the end of - time.
Also agree; all thumbs up. I found this the best FLIPPING THE LINE entry so far (best LINE entry over all?) well argued and succinct. Justifies my subscription.
There's more to being a Christian than just saying that you're a Christian. In the case of MAGA or QAnon, the adherents have seized on Christian as an identifier in the same way that they like to call themselves conservatives. They could also call themselves athletic, but it doesn't mean they're going to be fielding calls from the NHL or the Olympic team.
This feels like a happy person telling someone who is clinically depressed to "just be happy!" Or a clinically depressed person telling a happy person "why can't you see the many reasons to be sad?" Which, really, was the opposite of Jen's essay. I'll also, I'm sure, not be the only reader to recognize that the countries listed as having the best quality of life also boast the highest levels of suicide, and are at the forefront of assisted deaths. If "who cares?" and "don't worry about it" lead to a willing release from a meaningless and soulless living hell, then I'm not sure it's sage advice.
An exploration of why faith _seems_ to matter to a great number of people - including atheists - is part of our exploration of life as human beings. Deciding that it's an irrelevancy strikes me as an empty assertion, much as one could do the same with sexuality. Sure, you can assert that it doesn't matter, but it's not borne out by historical and present day experience and facts. David's other suggestion of simply belonging - to what, a club? a political party? a fan base?- is just that: merely belonging, not an intellectually considered and spiritually driven sense of being, which was - to me - the exploration being undertaken by Jen. And deciding to simply not care about it is, well, intellectually lazy.
It was entertaining that David closed with recommending the 21st century thing ("there's an app for that"), but I can't escape the notion that he's just vapidly happy, and thus ready for victimisation the next time life takes a turn for the worse. And no, that isn't enough. Keep pondering, Jen, and David, have fun with your smartphone - which, sadly, for most of humanity, does seem to be enough, for now.
I don't know if this helps or not, but it's notable that the two 20th century secular philosophies, communism, and fascism, organized themselves as religions. Stalin, a former seminarian, quite consciously organized the Communist Party as the Vatican, with the roles of Pope=General Secretary (Stalin), College of Cardinals=Politburo, and College of Bishops=Central Committee. Fascists were not so bureaucratically pedantic, but all were based on a Supreme Being, i.e., Hitler, Mussolini, or Franco. The similarity of these two groups with existing religious beliefs led them to be called, in some quarters at least, as "ersatz religions".
> Atheism is simply not having a belief in a God, and the New Atheists made that point.
Based on the “new atheists”, I think that’s false.
Those who lack an interest in playing cricket don’t spend their time telling you how much playing cricket sucks much less go out of their way to do it. The new atheist seemed rather strongly interested in telling you about how foolish and stupid religiosity was.
The new atheism at least seemed far more like a (dare I say) evangelical belief in the positive non existence of God.
"Take a look at the countries with the highest quality of life. The top places are countries like Sweden, Norway, Canada, Denmark, Finland — countries that are more secular than religious in nature."
The author seems blissfully unaware that correlation is NOT causation.
The rest of what he advocates is basic Eastern mysticism.
I am not religious, yet I converse with God every day. As far as I know, God does not have a religion. To embark on a "spiritual exploration" as the author suggests as one of his 3 tenets, would inevitably bring you face to face with God. Unless it was just a superficial atheist exercise.
Harris is wrong that the good life and a moral life can we be quantified and therefore is sufficient to judge competing values. Humans must look to the highest ideal to guide us, God. I hope you all revist this topic after reading "We Who Wrestle With God". Dare I ask for a podcast?
While the author makes an articulate case against Jen’s article, I’m puzzled by two of his conclusions. Being content with what you see about you may be fine if you’re one of Canada’s winners, but it seems to me to be a recipe for economic stagnation as a life philosophy. Ask all the South American refugees dying on marches through the jungle in search of the American dream, if they were content with what they saw about them. Or you can sit in your nice warm car watching a homeless person on the street slowly freezing to death and be content or maybe engage in a bit of meditation while waiting for the light to change.
I spent a fair bit of time and effort exploring meditation as part of yoga training. I stopped because I eventually concluded that meditation had too many elements of navel gazing and egotism and frankly dangerous if you live in a dangerous world where you need to be aware of your physical surroundings. It’s a great vehicle for promoting book sales, pricey retreats, and endless sales of scents and mystical jewelry and crafts.
So IMHO, religion and theism are subject to abuse by demagogues and cult leaders and need to be taken with a grain of salt. But as a moral compass to a large majority of humankind there definitely is and will be there for some - and hopefully to the end of - time.
Also agree; all thumbs up. I found this the best FLIPPING THE LINE entry so far (best LINE entry over all?) well argued and succinct. Justifies my subscription.
There's more to being a Christian than just saying that you're a Christian. In the case of MAGA or QAnon, the adherents have seized on Christian as an identifier in the same way that they like to call themselves conservatives. They could also call themselves athletic, but it doesn't mean they're going to be fielding calls from the NHL or the Olympic team.
This feels like a happy person telling someone who is clinically depressed to "just be happy!" Or a clinically depressed person telling a happy person "why can't you see the many reasons to be sad?" Which, really, was the opposite of Jen's essay. I'll also, I'm sure, not be the only reader to recognize that the countries listed as having the best quality of life also boast the highest levels of suicide, and are at the forefront of assisted deaths. If "who cares?" and "don't worry about it" lead to a willing release from a meaningless and soulless living hell, then I'm not sure it's sage advice.
An exploration of why faith _seems_ to matter to a great number of people - including atheists - is part of our exploration of life as human beings. Deciding that it's an irrelevancy strikes me as an empty assertion, much as one could do the same with sexuality. Sure, you can assert that it doesn't matter, but it's not borne out by historical and present day experience and facts. David's other suggestion of simply belonging - to what, a club? a political party? a fan base?- is just that: merely belonging, not an intellectually considered and spiritually driven sense of being, which was - to me - the exploration being undertaken by Jen. And deciding to simply not care about it is, well, intellectually lazy.
It was entertaining that David closed with recommending the 21st century thing ("there's an app for that"), but I can't escape the notion that he's just vapidly happy, and thus ready for victimisation the next time life takes a turn for the worse. And no, that isn't enough. Keep pondering, Jen, and David, have fun with your smartphone - which, sadly, for most of humanity, does seem to be enough, for now.
Eastern mysticism at its base is all that is on offer here. Perhaps the author is as yet, unaware?
I don't care who or what you believe in. I just ask that you don't try to impose that opinion on me....for God is nothing but an opinion.
This is wonderful- beautifully written and well reasoned with a dash of humour. My favourite post so far!
I don't know if this helps or not, but it's notable that the two 20th century secular philosophies, communism, and fascism, organized themselves as religions. Stalin, a former seminarian, quite consciously organized the Communist Party as the Vatican, with the roles of Pope=General Secretary (Stalin), College of Cardinals=Politburo, and College of Bishops=Central Committee. Fascists were not so bureaucratically pedantic, but all were based on a Supreme Being, i.e., Hitler, Mussolini, or Franco. The similarity of these two groups with existing religious beliefs led them to be called, in some quarters at least, as "ersatz religions".
> Atheism is simply not having a belief in a God, and the New Atheists made that point.
Based on the “new atheists”, I think that’s false.
Those who lack an interest in playing cricket don’t spend their time telling you how much playing cricket sucks much less go out of their way to do it. The new atheist seemed rather strongly interested in telling you about how foolish and stupid religiosity was.
The new atheism at least seemed far more like a (dare I say) evangelical belief in the positive non existence of God.
So all that to get to the golden rule? You sound like a polite and gentle version of Jordan Peterson's creed sans god.
Non-kook agnostic pragmatic sensibilism is my new church. All are welcome. It's also a brew-pub.
"Take a look at the countries with the highest quality of life. The top places are countries like Sweden, Norway, Canada, Denmark, Finland — countries that are more secular than religious in nature."
The author seems blissfully unaware that correlation is NOT causation.
The rest of what he advocates is basic Eastern mysticism.
"I sought my soul, my soul I could not see. I sought my god, my god eluded me. I sought my brother and found all three."
Agreed. Not believing in religion has gone from being so radical that it used to need a label as counterweight, now it’s just common sense.
I am not religious, yet I converse with God every day. As far as I know, God does not have a religion. To embark on a "spiritual exploration" as the author suggests as one of his 3 tenets, would inevitably bring you face to face with God. Unless it was just a superficial atheist exercise.
Harris is wrong that the good life and a moral life can we be quantified and therefore is sufficient to judge competing values. Humans must look to the highest ideal to guide us, God. I hope you all revist this topic after reading "We Who Wrestle With God". Dare I ask for a podcast?