nonsuch
15th May 2008, 11:25 AM
Daniel C Dennett's Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomena attempts to trace the growth of religion from its tribal and folk traditions to its present-day position in global conflict. It seems religion is always with us, from with-doctors to cardinals, from ritua humanl sacrifices to suicide bombers. Can we do without it? Should we do without it? How and why did it arise, socially, psychologically? What of the future? These are fascinating and provocative questions that we all ask ourselves from time to time. Whichever way one looks at it, it seems that, in the Abrahamic tradions at least, God has a lot to answer for. Is it therefore permissible to ask the simple question Does God exist? And if so in what form? Dennett, a natural scientist and philosopher, insists on examining evidence and opinion through the ages, presenting survey 'evidence' of current opinion, mainly American, and finally suggesting what might be the way forward in the quest to break the spell of magic and mystery that surrounds religious belief.
Yes, God has a lot to answer for. Except of course as the 'brights' know, He exists only as an idea, a meme, a cultural artifact that evolves and has evolved over eons according to each society's needs. 'Brights' incidentally, is Dennett's term for atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, secular humanists and other non-theists. Personally I find it rather smug and unfairly pejorative to believers and those less articulate or freethinking than the author, but this is a small quibble in what is a fascinating and entertaining read.
The 'Spell' that Dennett attempts to break is that of magic, the belief in the supernatural that so fascinates children and the naive, that shackling of freedom of thought that fosters the delegation of freewill and personal responsibility. Religion, Dennett insists, must be as open to enquiry as any other natural phenomena; it should not be granted any 'holy soil' and should have no hiding place from objective rational enquiry. Thus religion's rituals, elaborate ceremonies, taboos and terrifying threats and punishments for heresy or apostacy are exposed in the book for the frauds they are - tricks to catch the needy and the gullible, tools of master persuaders, tyrants and coercionists, those whom Karl Popper would no doubt term the enemies of the open society.
Valuably, the author disposes of that old chestnut that religion is essentially connected with morality. The Abrahamic religions' notion that man needs both a carrot (Paradise) and a stick (Hell) to be moral is seen as 'a demeaning view of human nature.' God the Policeman is not needed in modern democracies, and neither is God the Role-model, the pattern of a loving caring Creator to whom one looks for support anf guidance. Furthermore, he exposes the myth that moral good is in essence spiritual, as opposed to the 'moral evil' of scientific materialism. As Dennett puts it, conventional wisdom insists that 'we materialists are the bad guys, and those who believe in anything supernatural, however goofy and gullible the particular belief, have at least this much going for them: 'they're on the side of the angels''
Religion, as Dennett shows, has evolved, but it doesn't have to be good for us. It can be a balm, but it is also addictive and can be poisonous. And there is no God gene that has somehow promoted human survival; religion seduces but it is also dangerous to health. The solution? Education, according to the author, is the only answer, beginning with mixed sex schools competing with faith schools for pupils. Far from banning religious education from the syllabus, as in America, he suggests that through education and rational analysis 'we could start to change the climate of opinion that holds religion to be above discussion, above criticism, above challenge.'
The trouble is that you don't create an open society overnight, as it were; it takes years, centuries, eons even, to evolve an antidote to religious toxins. Breaking the Spell demands as much faith and dedication as all the collective 'brights' can muster.
Yes, God has a lot to answer for. Except of course as the 'brights' know, He exists only as an idea, a meme, a cultural artifact that evolves and has evolved over eons according to each society's needs. 'Brights' incidentally, is Dennett's term for atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, secular humanists and other non-theists. Personally I find it rather smug and unfairly pejorative to believers and those less articulate or freethinking than the author, but this is a small quibble in what is a fascinating and entertaining read.
The 'Spell' that Dennett attempts to break is that of magic, the belief in the supernatural that so fascinates children and the naive, that shackling of freedom of thought that fosters the delegation of freewill and personal responsibility. Religion, Dennett insists, must be as open to enquiry as any other natural phenomena; it should not be granted any 'holy soil' and should have no hiding place from objective rational enquiry. Thus religion's rituals, elaborate ceremonies, taboos and terrifying threats and punishments for heresy or apostacy are exposed in the book for the frauds they are - tricks to catch the needy and the gullible, tools of master persuaders, tyrants and coercionists, those whom Karl Popper would no doubt term the enemies of the open society.
Valuably, the author disposes of that old chestnut that religion is essentially connected with morality. The Abrahamic religions' notion that man needs both a carrot (Paradise) and a stick (Hell) to be moral is seen as 'a demeaning view of human nature.' God the Policeman is not needed in modern democracies, and neither is God the Role-model, the pattern of a loving caring Creator to whom one looks for support anf guidance. Furthermore, he exposes the myth that moral good is in essence spiritual, as opposed to the 'moral evil' of scientific materialism. As Dennett puts it, conventional wisdom insists that 'we materialists are the bad guys, and those who believe in anything supernatural, however goofy and gullible the particular belief, have at least this much going for them: 'they're on the side of the angels''
Religion, as Dennett shows, has evolved, but it doesn't have to be good for us. It can be a balm, but it is also addictive and can be poisonous. And there is no God gene that has somehow promoted human survival; religion seduces but it is also dangerous to health. The solution? Education, according to the author, is the only answer, beginning with mixed sex schools competing with faith schools for pupils. Far from banning religious education from the syllabus, as in America, he suggests that through education and rational analysis 'we could start to change the climate of opinion that holds religion to be above discussion, above criticism, above challenge.'
The trouble is that you don't create an open society overnight, as it were; it takes years, centuries, eons even, to evolve an antidote to religious toxins. Breaking the Spell demands as much faith and dedication as all the collective 'brights' can muster.