Unit 5.1 Critiques of Religion

A Level Religious Studies

5.1 Critiques of Religion

Name:

Introduction

Religious belief, religion, religious languages and associated issues are at the centre of a large amount of scholarly discussion. There are a large number of scholars of theistic, atheistic and agnostic viewpoints who have added their voices to the ongoing debate and discussion surrounding this multifaceted topic. Those who are of an agnostic or atheistic viewpoint tend to put forward theories as to why human beings have developed religion and critique the way in which it is used, such as Durkheim's sociological critique of religion. These are explanations for the widespread phenomenon of religious belief without the necessity for the deity around which the religion is centred to be actually real, as consistent with the beliefs (or lack thereof) of the scholars who posit these views. Various theistic scholars have replied to such ideas in their own words, attempting to posit a response in academic terms for their peers' ideas regarding religious belief. An example of such an interaction which involved a direct debate on religious ideas such as contingency and religious experience between two academic scholars is the 1948 BBC radio debate between Frederick Copleston and Bertrand Russell, which will be discussed in 5.2. ‘

5.1 Context to critiques of religious belief and points for discussion

With reference to the ideas of R Dawkins and M Westphal.

What you need to know:

Topic

Content

Key Knowledge

5.1 Context to critiques of religious belief and points for discussion

Key terms, types of atheism and agnosticism

What atheism is

- Strong and weak

What agnosticism is.

What humanism is.

Criticisms of Religion

Respective strengths and weaknesses of religious beliefs

Prayer and Order

Comfort and Morality

Martin Luther King, Mother Terressa

Alternative explanations

The sociological critique of religion

· Marx and Durkheim

The psychological critique of religion

· Freud and Jung

, issues of probability

The popular Critique of religion –

· Dawkins and the new atheists populist critique of religion – unfounded (genetics can explain), and immoral.

The postmodern interpretations of religion

The postmodern interpretation of religion

· Modernism and postmodernism- truth, God and

· Hervieu-Leger - the Postmodern Interpretation of Religion -1. memory loss 2 Religious Consumerism 3 Individual Construction?

· David Lyon - the analysis of Postmodern Interpretation of Religion - 1 Religion & The Internet, 2 Religious Choice 3. Still Relevant?

You need to understand the issues related to different views of religious language, including:

· Whether or not strong or weak atheism, agnosticism or humanism is a better position.

· Whether or not the sociological or psychological critiques are more convincing approach to the understanding and critiquing the phenomenon religion

· A comparison of the ideas of R Dawkins and M Westphal , including:

- whether philosophical theology is still possible or only philosophy or religion

- the influence of Hume, Marx and Nietzsche and whether scepticism or suspicion is better

- how far the Critique’s of religion remains valuable in philosophy of religion

Each of the approaches to speaking about God claim that religious statements are to some extent cognitive as opposed to non-cognitive. However, when words are used to describe God, so they mean exactly the same as they would mean in their normal context? This would be to use the words univocally. Or do they mean something very different when describing God? This would be to use the words equivocally.

Key Words

Key Words:

Atheism – This means literally 'without God' or 'no God'. It refers to the viewpoint held by individuals that there is no

God. It is the positive belief or assertion there no God

Strong Atheism – A viewpoint held by individuals whereby they have an explicit and firm belief that God does not exist.

Anti-theism – The belief that there is no God, it is wrong to believe that God does exist and those who do should be corrected. They consider religious belief dangerous, rather than simply choosing not to believe it themselves.

Unbelief – A lack or absence of religious belief. Further it is where someone has no belief in God in the sense of having an absence of belief (Apatheism). This could include those too young or too mentally inform to have any concept of belief in God, or those who have never given the question of God any thought and whose lives do not include any reference to God

Weak Atheism – A viewpoint held by individuals whereby they do not believe God does exist but do not explicitly believe or particularly acknowledge that God does not exist.

The New Atheists A movement begun by Dawkinsbook the god delusion- also Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennet amongst others- who poblished a slew of populist critiques of religion.

Agnosticism – Agnosticism holds that it is not possible to know whether God exits, or to know his nature. An agnostic may well claim to be open to the possibility of knowledge leading to belief rather than non-belief, but may not be able what it would take for them to do so

Humanism – Humanism is usually based on the premise that there is no God, and that humanity has the power through reason and logic to create it’s own code of ethics. We don’t need to reply on a higher power to know what is right and wrong We shouldn’t do good things with the thought of a reward – but because it is the right thing to do! Humanists believes in scientific methods when it comes to understanding how the universe works. They make their ethical decisions based on reason, empathy, and a concern for human beings and that human beings should seek happiness in this life and helping others to do the same.

Criticisms of Religion – Atheists, Agnostics and Humans argue that Religion hinders human progress as 1. It encourages people to accept that there are unexplained mysteries rather than telling them to look for answers; 2. It encourages people to follow and imposed ethical code rather than one which comes from human reasoning; 3. It encourages people to be dependant to a being greater than themselves rather than having confidence in their own capabilities

Anticlericalism – The idea that no religion should have a monopoly on what is considered truth and the power of being the receiver of truth.

Functional explanation – A critique of religion as existing to serve a particular purpose within society.

Projection – The unconscious transfer of one's desires, emotions or needs onto something else. It is a form of defence against unwanted feelings by denying their existence in oneself through attributing them to others.

Neurosis – A mental illness.

Collective Uncocnsiousness – Jung's theory of the human mind proposes that humans have 3 levels of consciousness: 1. Consciousness – part of the mind that is directly accessible to the individual. 2. The Personal Consciousness – this is unique to the individual and is developed over the persons lifetime (lost memories, repressed memories, social conditioning etc). 3. The Collective Unconsciousness – This does not depend on personal experience – it is the deepest and most extensive part of the psyche – a reservoir of unconsciousness content common to all humanity

Archtype – These are primordial images common to all humans. They are inherited in the same way animals have instincts. Patterns of knowledge that have been passed down. For example – a bird knows how to build a next without being taught

5.1 Context to Critiques of Religion and Points of Discussion

Key Terms

The critiques studied here, by Marx, Freud and Durkheim, have been very influential in modern thought. They can be seen as contributing to the rise of atheism and agnosticism. These are beliefs regarding the unbelief (lack of belief) in God.

Types of atheism: there is great debate about what the definition of atheism is, as to whether it could be described as merely the absence of belief (unbelief) in God, or whether or it is the firm belief that there is no God.

There are different types of atheism, generally speaking, such as weak atheism and strong atheism. A weak atheist is an individual who does not believe in God but does not necessarily emphatically state this belief or advocate against belief in God. They simply do not believe in God, and may not even acknowledge their unbelief.

A strong atheist is an individual who is explicit in their belief that there is no God. Such an individual will assert their belief that God does not exist and oppose the practice of religion.

There are more modern forms of atheism that have emerged within the last couple of decades, arguably in reaction to world events such as the increase in religious-based violence in the form of terror attacks. An example of a famous atheist is Richard Dawkins.

Questions:

1. What are the different Types of atheism:??

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. What is a A strong atheist? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. What is a weak atheist??

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Respective Strengths and Weaknesses of Religious Belief

In the philosophical study of religion, it is important to consider both the strengths and weaknesses of any argument. Many theists, atheists and agnostic philosophers have over the years attempted to show the strengths and weaknesses of religious belief.

The strengths of religious belief could be considered to be the following:

• The presence of order within the world; it does seem difficult to process that a place of such complexity (irreducible complexity) could have happened as a result of chaos.

• The beauty we can observe and the greatness of the world have no biological gain; therefore, it would point to a purpose beyond biological chance. This could be design.

• Some prayers have been testified by believers to have been answered.

• Many of the moral teachings within Scripture appeal to our innate sense of morality, e.g. innately believing that killing other human beings is wrong.

• It provides comfort for those who need it and a hope for life after death, where they could be reunited with loved ones.

• Religious experiences have been frequently documented - such a wealth of testimony and evidence suggests that all of these cannot be untruths. Th is probably would indicate that it is likely there is truth to be found there.

• There are many moral ideas and teachings which are held commonly within the major world religions.

• Religious beliefs have led people t o do incredible things in the name of God, such as aid work and caring for the poor or sick.

• Religious beliefs have also influenced people to address injustices in society in a peaceful way, such as in the case of Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

• Religious teachings encourage goodness in people, ideally leading to a harmonious society.

Weaknesses of religion could be considered to be the following:

• Religious experiences can be explained in other ways, e.g. as hallucinations.

• The existence of evil and suffering in the world is incompatible with belief in a loving God who would not want humans to suffer, and in an omnipotent God who is powerful enough to end evil or to have created the world without it.

• The world is better explained through science.

• There is not sufficient evidence God does exist - he does not seem to want to make himself known to people. Therefore, it could be argued to be more probable that he doesn't exist.

• Religious arguments include numerous theological inconsistencies and illogical statements, e.g. that God is omnipotent but created a world in which there is suffering.

• God is invented by people who are emotionally, intellectually or psychologically weak, and only believe in God to help with these problems.

• Prayers are not answered.

• Scripture contains lack of coherence.

• Moral teachings are outdated and have no relevance today.

• Religious beliefs have led people to do terrible things in the name of God.

• Religious beliefs encourage followers to be good because it is what God wants, instead of because it is good, which would be more moral.

EXAM PREP

The critiques outlined here set out to support atheism. You need to decide if you think they are successful in doing this. Consider whether you find their arguments convincing.

These reasons are cited by many who chose atheism as their belief system (explained later in this section) as being reasons why religion might be considered to be a less probable explanation for the things which we experience within the world, and indeed for the world itself.

Such people might proffer alternative explanations for religious belief. These are explored below.

Alternative Explanations

This topic discusses some of the critiques of religion from outside the field of theology and religious studies primarily sociology and psychology. So far, you have been critiquing religion from a philosophical perspective and discussing whether certain religious arguments are philosophically sound. Sociology and psychology offer a different kind of critique. Sociology sees religion as the product of society and as a societal institution. Psychology sees religion as a product of the mind and acted out due to psychological dispositions. These offer alternative explanations as to why religious beliefs have developed.

Naturalism and Materialism

Another argument for the non-existence of God (and, therefore, against religious belief) comes from the theories of naturalism and materialism.

Naturalism is the belief that true knowledge can only be gained through examination of the world around us. It considers beliefs based on supernatural knowledge to be incorrect as they cannot be empirically verified.

It interprets religion as existing only in the natural world -rather than pointing to a higher or other realm - and is, therefore, a societal construct. It is likely to be concerned with how religion develops in different societies and what function or purpose it serves. This view is influential over sociological critiques of religion.

Materialism is the belief that only physical matter exists. It interprets humans to be made up purely of material substances; for example, mental processes are the result of chemical changes in the brain. It denies the existence of non-material things such as God or supernatural activity. Therefore, religious beliefs are purely the result of neurological and psychological factors. This view is influential over psychological critiques of religion.

Questions:

1. Give a strength of religious belief . …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Give a weakness of religious belief.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. Define naturalism.? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4. Define materialism.?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Sociological Critique of Religious Belief - Emile Durkheim (1858-1917)

A sociological critique of religious belief interprets religion to be a sociological phenomenon; as existing and performing certain functions in society. It recognises how religion affects and organises human behaviour within societies and gives meaning to human existence.

Emile Durkheim was a French sociologist. He critiqued religion in his book The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. He gave a functional explanation for religion. This means that religion exists as a way to serve a particular function or practical purpose. The implication of this is that religion is not the product of divine truths, existing to worship God. It is given a purely secular purpose. Ultimately, God does not exist, but is the product of human society.

Different sociologists give slightly different functional explanations for Religion. Durkheim interpreted it to be a way to:

• hold and bind societies together

• preserve and enforce the social and moral order

• create general cohesiveness between individuals

• give meaning and purpose to life This cohesiveness, unity and order is principally reinforced through society's performance of religious rituals. In ritual s, profane (ordinary) objects are imbued with sacred (divine) sighificance, such as the cross in Christianity. There is, however, no divine reality behind such objects, only the meanings of society which have been projected onto them.

Religious force is nothing other than the collective and anonymous force of the clan. Durkheim, E, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life

Religions reflect the reality of the society: they express 'a system of notions by which individuals imagine the society to which they belong'. The society has shared rituals, values and identity which form part of this reality and have become the object of worship what Durkheim called 'society divinized'. Therefore, religion is not the result of individuals alone, but the result of society acting together.

Analysis

• Religious believers do not hold that their worship is focused on the community or society. They distinguish between members of their religious community and belief in God. Equally, the meaning behind rituals and sacred objects is not interpreted by religious believers to be the ideals of society - it can sometimes even go against them.

• In multicultural societies, multiple religions can be practiced within one cohesive society.

• It is not consistent with the examples of religious believers who do not preserve the existing social order but actually act against it, encouraging reform and changes to society. E.g. Martin Luther King

• Durkheim's theory is modelled on primitive aboriginal societies, e.g. primitive clan worship of a totem, which is different from modern religion today.

• Religion and society are not the same. Society's beliefs change, whereas religious beliefs often aim to remain the same and resist the changing beliefs in society.

• Religions are not purely focused on their own society but are often concerned with the whole of humanity and with encouraging universal adherence and moral codes.

• Whilst society constantly changes, beliefs about God are timeless. In many cases religion resists the changing of societies belief (no sex before marriage!)

• There are many reasons to suggest that God does exist (which you have studied) which suggests religion may not be purely a societal phenomenon or human construct. The fact that religion has a role in society does not mean it is not true - it could perform both functions.

Sociological Critique of Religious Belief - Karl Marx (1818-1883)

Karl Marx was a German philosopher and political theorist, but was most famous as a communist revolutionary.

Marx interpreted religion as being utilised by the ruling classes to dominate and oppress the masses. While spiritualism as whole can be viewed as important in Marxism, religion served this function because it made the masses believe they could find escape and freedom through the afterlife offered by religion. This stopped the masses rising up against the ruling classes to try to bring about greater equality and challenge the social order in this life.

Marx believed Christianity enforced the view that what happened on Earth was part of God's divine, providential plan. It was what God wanted. Therefore, to try to change the problems and oppression would be to challenge God. Karl Marx

When Marx was writing, workers did not have many rights and were often exploited by factory owners and social elites. if the workers had protested or gone on strike, this would have caused a loss of money and power for the ruling class.

Marx famously called religion the 'opium of the masses'. This means religion is a drug that changes the outlook of believers and pacifies them.

Marx predicted that eventually workers would rise up and there would be a communist revolution . At this time, religion would wither away.

Overall, religion was an illusion. There was no God or higher reality. it was invented by the few within society to achieve their own selfish purposes, and to ensure society remained unequal and unfair to the majority of people.

Analysis

• Religion and the ruling classes or state are more separate today than Marx assumed. Those with power in society today are often completely unrelated to religion.

• Marx could be argued to falsely criticise Christianity because it has many teachings about caring for the poor and loving one's neighbours.

• Nowhere in Christian teaching or tradition does religion claim to try to pacify the masses, although Marx would argue that the ruling classes would, of course, never admit to what they were doing.

• Liberation theology, a movement in South America, showed that Christianity can change society to improve inequality and poverty. The central aim of liberation theology is to synthesise Marxist and Christian ideas.

• Marx argues Christianity and other religions are a contributing factor to why workers have remained oppressed under capitalism. The issue is arguably not with the religion itself but rather with the way it is manifested within a capitalist state. The ruling classes don't directly employ Christianity, but rather Christian institutions become part of the ruling classes and the theology of Christianity teaches concepts such as reversal- where the poor will become rich in the afterlife, making them think their suffering is justified.

• Marx tied religion as an illusion to happiness. Religion persists because it gives people comfort in their life, in his view. Religion would, therefore, in this view, wither away under communism because people could realise their happiness in an equal society. Every part of Marx's views has to be connected to its place with his structural ideas of capitalist and communist societies.

Questions:

1. How does a sociological critique of religious belief interprets religion?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Who was Durkheim? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. What was the viewpoint of Durkheim regarding religion? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4. What contribution was Durkheim’s sociological critique of religious belief ? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. How successful is the Durkheim?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

6. Who was Marx?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

7. What was the viewpoint of Marx regarding religion? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

8. What contribution was Durkheim’s sociological critique of religious belief ?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

9. How successful is the Marx ?

Psychological Critique of Religious Belief - Sigmund Freud (1858-1939)

It Freud was an Austrian psychologist, and one of the most famous thinkers of the twentieth century.

Freud gave a psychological (rather than sociological) explanation of religion. It is a psychological account which put forwards the idea of religion as projection. Freud argued religion was an 'illusion' and existed because believers have the psychological need

to project their fears, anxieties and subconscious onto something greater than themselves as a way to relieve them. It is a way to cope with feelings of helplessness, our inner impulses, and fears of death. Religion originates in the child's and young mankind's fears and need for help. It cannot be otherwise. 14

Proponents of a projective explanation argue that religion restricts individuals from realising their full potential. It also leads to the false belief that God exists and other damaging beliefs, such as that there are divine truths which are superior to beliefs from science.

When a man is freed of religion, he has a better chance to live a normal and wholesome life. Freud, S, The Future of on Illusion

Freud famously called religion a neurosis; it is a form of mental illness, a figment of the subconscious, rather than part of reality.

Religion is a system of wishful illusions together with a disavowal of reality, such as we find nowhere else but in a state of blissful hallucinatory confusion. Freud, S, The Future of on Illusion

Freud explained the psychological need for religion through his famous idea of the Oedipus complex. Freud argued in Interpretation of Dreams (1899) that part of normal human development is a desire for sexual involvement with one's mother and a rivalry with or a wish to kill one's father. The desire to overthrow or kill one's father, as described in the Oedipus complex, leads the son to have unresolved feelings of guilt. These feelings are worked out by elevating the memory of his father to a position of worship - he becomes a godlike figure. Religious rituals also help individuals resolve these feelings. Belief in God – is just a way of overcompensating for negative feelings towards a father In Freud's view, religion is a response to a human being's anxiety about chaos in the natural world. He claimed that there are a number of underlying psychological motives underlying religious belief such as feelings of helplessness, fear of death etc He believed that religious rituals function to protect the ego from fantasies, desires and sexual impulses A god is invoked as a way to bring order to things, as can be appeased by human actions. This god then often takes human characteristics that mirror this order and comfort, e.g. father. As such, religion is built upon neurosis, and accommodates others such as the Oedipus complex; this is the way Freud believed it should be understood. Freud argues that as scientific understanding of the natural world grows, there is less need for religion as a response to anxiety. Freud also claims that guilt also plays an important role in the psyche – religion helps to manage and deal with this.

God is, therefore, a father substitute and a projection of the super ego (internal conscience which is constructed by societal influences).

Analysis

• Nelson and Jones (1957) said that the concept of God correlated more closely with a person's relationship with their mother than with their father, as Freud suggested.

• Kate Lowenthal argued that not all religion is projective and immature. Some religious beliefs are intrinsic, serious and reflective. He further ignores the diversity and development of religious belief

• Arthur Guirdham argued that an anti-religious stance could be just as neurotic as the religious view of others.

• Freud's theory is not as objective as he claimed and could be considered Freud's subjective opinion. This has contributed to his decline in influence in psychology. Freud's own anti-religious stance further may be just as neurotic as the religious ideas of others.

• Pete Moore suggests that Freud's need to explain everything according to sex might tell us more about Freud himself than religion .

It should be stressed that Freud's scientific reliability is widely viewed as being highly flawed. His conclusions were drawn from data which was limited in many ways and is, therefore, considered unreliable and unscientific.

If God did exist, it wouldn't be out of the realms of possibility that human beings could psychologically understand him or feel drawn to him. Therefore, Freud's argument boils down to: 'if God does not exist, there would be psychological elements of religion'. This is linked to Freud's views about psychic determinism. This is beyond the scope of this spec, but might be useful if you wish to stretch and challenge your knowledge.

Questions:

1. Who was Freud?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. What is The Oedipus Complex?? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. How does Freud link the Oedipus Complex to religion?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4. What other views did Freud have on religion?? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. Give 3 criticism of his argument?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Carl Jung

Carl Gustav Jung was a Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst who founded analytical psychology.

His work has been influential not only in psychiatry but also in anthropology, archaeology, literature, philosophy, and religious studies

He is not clear on if he believes God exists

Yet he argues that religion is beneficial to humanity

Jung & Consciousness

Jung's theory of the human mind proposes that humans have 3 levels of consciousness:

1. Consciousness – part of the mind that is directly accessible to the individual

2. The Personal Consciousness – this is unique to the individual and is developed over the persons lifetime (lost memories, repressed memories, social conditioning etc)

3. The Collective Unconsciousness – This does not depend on personal experience – it is the deepest and most extensive part of the psyche – a reservoir of unconsciousness content common to all humanity

Archetypes

He argues we have a ‘collective unconscious. The Collective unconscious contains archetypes These are primordial images common to all humans. They are inherited in the same way animals have instincts. Patterns of knowledge that have been passed down. For example – a bird knows how to build a next without being taught

The same way humans have a collective consciousness which contains ideas

Archetype Examples

Jung wrote extensively about the way in which myths, legends and fairy tales from all around the world contain common elements and recognisable characters which repeat over and over

The hero archetype

Jung & Religion

Jung's understanding of God is that God is an archetype. God is a manifestation of the deepest levels of the collective consciousness. God is a reality within the psyche – we all have an innate sense of God – this is shared with all of humanity. This raises the question - does God actually exists? Or is he a creation of our psyche. Jung never answers this question!

He does argue that God clearly exists within our psyche. God comes from the part of our mind which is pre-existent, timeless and universal. When we have religious experiences and experience God they feel that something outside themselves is happening – this is because the collective consciousness if beyond our control. These experiences are not signs of neurotic behaviour as claimed by Freud but a right recognition of the shared archetype God image. Religious belief therefore in beneficial as it helps people pull together in the shared archetype of God and gives people a better understanding of themselves.

Questions:

1. Who is Jung?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Name the 3 types of consciousness? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. What is an archetype?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4. How does this link to religion? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. What is his contribution to the critique of religion?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Postmodern Interpretation of Religion

Postmodernism is a movement which developed in the middle to late twentieth century, becoming popularised in the 1960s to 1980s. It has influences on philosophy, culture, architecture and art. Generally, ideas surrounding postmodernism are linked to ideas of scepticism and academic critique.

Postmodernist theory believes that the UK and other western societies have experienced major economic and cultural change in the past 20 years. They claim that this transformation from modern society to postmodern society has profound implications for religious organisations and the way religion is practised .Postmodernists argue that people have become disillusioned with the old narratives of science, politics and religion.

Postmodernism & Truth

Postmodernists argue that people no longer see knowledge and truth as absolutes. People understand that there are no right answers. Instead people are turning to ‘relativism’ – the notion that there are many ways of looking at a problem - all of which have some validity. Postmodernists argue that people have become disillusioned with the old of science, politics and religion such as:

• For example, science, for all its benefits, is seen to have a downside associated with environmental destruction.

• Political ideologies such as communism have been discredited whilst people generally no longer have faith in politicians.

• The established Christian religions are experiencing secularisation as people make the choice not to go to church.

Modernist thought places a high emphasis on reason, resulting in quite literal interpretations of the world / meaning, i.e. logical positivism can be seen as the end result. On the other hand, postmodernism argues reason itself is not a universal, unchanging force - interpretation can never escape the investigator's own biases and conditions. This means a text such as the Bible can never be exhausted of meaning, and religion can evolve in understanding as times change. Therefore, conservative Christians, for example, are more modernist than they let on in imposing one view on the Bible, while more liberal critics falsely think postmodernism leads to relativism, when faith behind the objects in the Bible rejects this. So this accords more with non-cognitive understandings of religious language, etc. It is also important to note before further discussion of the ideas of postmodernists such as Westphal, that a lack of absoluteness or reasonableness does not affect validity of religion.

Ideas surrounding religion have been influenced; however, this influence is not just because of the period of postmodernism. The Enlightenment period is known for having been one of the most influential periods of history regarding the development of thought. It was immediately before the writing of Hegel, which is referenced by Westphal. It was a time in which academia and politics experienced a shift to reason as separate from religion. It saw huge shifts in the way in which science and philosophy were understood, and introduced many conflicts as a result of new thought meeting religion.

At this time there was also a historical instance of many violent conflicts at the heart of which was religion. Many thinkers at this time sought to find some kind of unity within faith in order to bring about peace. It was the seeking of some kind of moral unity. From this background we can see the context for the development of the ideas which Westphal discusses make sense.

Postmodernism & God

In a world where there is no objectively existing God "out there", and where the elaborate sociological and psychological theories of religion don't seem to ring true, the idea of regarding religion as the totality of religious experiences has some appeal. Religion in this theory is created, altered, renewed in various formal interactions between human beings. There is no one 'right' or 'wrong' religion - or sanctifying theory. There are as many as there are groups and interactions, and they merge and join, divide and

separate over and over again. Some are grouped together under the brand names of major faiths, and they cohere with varying degrees of consistency.

Hervieu-Leger

Argues that Postmodern thought has WEAKENED religion. Argues 3 Points: 1 Memory Loss 2 Religious Consumerism 3 Individual Construction

Memory Loss

Postmodern societies have experienced a collective loss of religious memory. She notes that for centuries, children used to be taught religion in the extended family, at school and at Sunday school at the local parish church. Religion was handed down generation by generation. However, in postmodern societies, religious knowledge and stories are no longer handed down by parents to their children. Instead parents often let children decide for themselves with regard to religious belief

Religious Consumerism

She argues that individual consumerism has replaced collective tradition with regard to religious belief and practice. She argues that people today feel that they are consumers of religion and consequently they have become spiritual shoppers in a religious marketplace characterised by great diversity and choice.

Individual Construction

Moreover, Hervieu-Leger argues that religion is now more individualised in postmodern society. This means that people can construct their own unique programmes of religious belief and practice rather than having it imposed on them by membership of an organised religion. This do-it-yourself approach to religion allows people to explore spirituality in their own time and in their own way.

Analysis

David Lyon - Argues that in postmodern society traditional religion is being replaced by new religious forms that suggest religion is still important. He makes three important observations: 1 Religion & The Internet, 2 Religious Choice 3. Still Relevant

Religion & The Internet

He argues that the globalisation of mass media, especially the rise of satellite television and the internet, has ‘disembedded’ religion. This means that religious beliefs and practices have been lifted out of their normal context, i.e. the physical church with its fixed programme of worship, and moved to media sites so that people can choose to practice religion at their own convenience. Lyon notes that many religions now have web-sites – the ‘electronic church’ is becoming the norm – or global satellite television channels. People no longer have to physically go to their local churches to worship – they can just log on to their computer or turn on the television. Religion has become de-institutionalised and instead become a cultural resource that individuals can adopt and adapt for their own purposes.

Religious Choice

Lyon argues that people in postmodern societies construct their identities through what they choose to consume. Lyon argues that people have not abandoned religion. Instead religion has re-located to the sphere of consumption and people have become conscious consumers choosing to relate to those bits of different religions that they find useful.

Still Relevant

Lyon is very critical of the view that religion is being replaced by a rational scientific worldview. He argues that society is actually experiencing a period of ‘re-enchantment’ in which there has been a growth in unconventional religious beliefs, practices and spirituality. From Lyon’s perspective, religious beliefs and practices are just as strong as ever –they just take different forms compared with the past.

Questions:

1. What is the Postmodern Interpretation of Religion?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. What did modernism do and how is post modernism different? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. What is the Postmodern approach to the interpretation of Religion and ideas around God?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4. What contribution does the Postmodern Interpretation of Religion?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. What contribution does the Hervieu-Leger make to the Postmodern Interpretation of Religion in terms of memory loss Religious Consumerism 3 Individual Construction?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

6. What contribution does the David Lyon make to the analysis of Postmodern Interpretation of Religion in terms of 1 Religion & The Internet, 2 Religious Choice 3. Still Relevant?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Westphal’s Interpretation of Religion

Professor of Philosophy at Fordham University. His academic interests focuses on mainly European philosophers from Kant to the modern dayHe wrote an article called

‘The emergence of modern philosophy of religion’

Westphal attempts to show how philosophy and religious thought has developed over time

• He starts with the Enlightenment and discusses HOW philosophers attempted to find truth

• He introduces Kant's ideas of using reason to understand God

• He counters this with Hegel's argument that God is beyond our understanding

• He then discusses those who reject religion all together

• He concludes it is our continuous search for truth which is important

Which takes an overview of the direction of philosophy from the time of Kant to the beginning of the twentieth century In his famous essay on postmodern discussions of religion, Merold Westphal (Professor of Philosophy at Fordham University) does not offer his own opinion but rather writes an account of different scholars and the post Enlightenment and postmodern view of religion. He focuses on the ideas of scholasticism and deism in pre-Kantian thought. He also addresses ecclesiology and epistemology. He addresses too the views of different scholars and philosophers on this issue of religion, and the new emerging ways of discussing religion that emerged during the Enlightenment.

He believes that deism found its roots in the Enlightenment. The reasons for the shift and changes happening were based in historical power structures and events - the Church had traditionally enjoyed the status of having been given the special revelation from God and, therefore, the receiver of truth. The thinkers of the Enlightenment started a discussion with a view to changing this. It also marks a shift within discourses surrounding religion and philosophy - the focus of the discussion went from being God to being religion itself.

Westphal makes a distinction between two types of philosophical theology:

• Scholastic: reason, faith and revelation are harmonious – and can work together in harmony. Some understanding of God can be worked out using reason – other things about God are understood using faith and revelation

• Deistic: wish to separate reason from faith and revelation. We can learn about God through reason alone – everything else is believed using faith

Immanuel Kant is one of the philosophers on whose work Westphal focuses within his essay. Westphal focuses in turn on both scholasticism and deism.

Scholasticism allowed religion and faith to be combined, whereas deism separated the two ideas. Deism is the belief that there is a first cause which created the world (such as the God of traditional Judaeo-Christianity).

However, within deism this God does not interfere with the world - he has left the world to be. Westphal, like many others within the community of the Enlightenment thinkers, thought that the conflicts caused by religion could only be stopped when religion could be unified under what was termed the 'universality of reason' - that being, that those who were of religious backgrounds agreed upon certain principles.

Individualistic claims held by religions in this view had to be done away with; for example, a Christian could not claim that Christ is the only way, and Jews could not claim to be God's chosen people. No religion, he argued, had the monopoly on truth. Individualist claims which do not unite religions had to be rejected.

The ‘Kernel’

The rational - we experience / can use logic to understand

Deism, in the view of Kant, had an emphasis on the inherently human facets of religion. It was less about saying what one could or could not about God, and more about stopping the potentially harmful effects of religious dogma. He argued that this movement is because of three main concerns he observed within humanity and society:

1. The importance (and authority) of the use of human reason

The ‘Husk’

The faith – may seem irrational, we need belief and faith

2. Tolerance of religion, among those who are religious and those who are not

3. Anticlericalism

Westphal refers to this as the ‘kernel’ and ‘husk’ of religion The ‘Kernel’ is the rational part of religion(i.e God created the universe via design argument)

The ‘Husk’ is the part which is not available to human reason and depends on faith (i.e belief in miracles / messages from God revealed to priests)

Kant and Hume argue that their use in their writings and thoughts of a priori and a posteriori critiques of the traditional arguments for God (i.e. cosmological, design and ontological) succeeded. They felt that they had sufficiently made the case against these arguments. They did not believe that they had disproved God, but disproved the arguments being made for God. Interestingly, it should be noted here that Kant himself was in fact a devout Christian. They then turned their attention from discussions of God towards religious practices. They believed that there had been sufficient discussion on the topic of these arguments and, therefore, something of substance could only be established by discussion on the topic of religion and how religion impacts the lives of individuals and groups.

They argue for a universal religion of sorts. Kant considers that tradition and rituals of the Church are, in his view, a form of fetish. The things over which people were warring - religious dogmas and practices - are of little consequence. He instead posits that the best way to be 'religious' is to love God and love others. By loving others, love of God is displayed, which does not happen through thought rituals.

For Kant, religion and morality are two separate things. Morality does not necessarily need religion. Religion views duties as divine commands rather than moral acts out of genuine goodness. However, morality does lead to religion, in the view of Kant. He believed that the Christ of religion is best used as a moral example.

Hegel

Westphal introduces Hegel who argued against Kant. Hegel rejected both Deistic and Scholastic Philosophy when attempting to find truth. He argued they are only adequate when dealing with matters of this world God is infinite and beyond us. He placed great importance on the human spirit He thought that the human spirit could be elevated to an understanding of itself and its relation to infinity. He believed that there is truth in all kinds of religions but Christianity is the highest form of religion as Jesus was incarnated and taught this truth. Hegel rejects both the ‘Kernal’ and the ‘Husk’ of religion. Claiming using human reason to understand God is pointless as he is beyond our comprehension. Instead he claimed that humanity and the human spirit proves Gods divinity Christianity is the ultimate religion as Jesus was incarnate as part of humanity and taught us truth

Westphal's Rejecters of Religion – Hume, Marx Nietzsche

The philosophers of the Enlightenment sought to find truth through reason. This lead to dissatisfaction with traditional Christianity which rejected reason and based teachings on doctrine and revealed theology. Westphal introduces three philosophers who, instead of seeking to find solutions to religious thought – rejected it all together:

Scepticism and Suspicion

Westphal first makes a distinction between scepticism and suspicion

• Sceptic: Questions the truth of belief itself

• Suspicious: Wonders if these beliefs are genuinely held or if there is an ulterior motive

Hume The Sceptic

Hume suggests religion came about because people believed that God controlled nature and natural forces. The worshipped God – not out of love, but because they wanted the Gods to provide them with material success. Religion was built on stupidity and greed

Marx The Suspicious

In Marx’s view organised religion is often controlled by those in power (the richer members of society) as is presented as an ‘opiate’ to keep the poor in place. He argued religion is fully determined by economics – that there is no merit to doctrine or belief. He observed that man created God – not the other way around

Nietzsche the Sceptic

is also discussed; he believed religion to be limiting humanity from fulfilling its full potential.

‘God is dead’. Did not believe in a God or the afterlife – rejected all theist belief, This world is all there is – human life is essentially pointless, But rather than retreating into gloom we should live life to its fullest, Because God is dead we need to rethinking our morals and attitudes – we should use whatever moral value system that pleases us the most

The ideas of rationalism also emerged here. God, it is argued, could be understood within theory through pure reason (a priori) rather than though experience (empiricism). This, it was then argued, tied religion not to one particular Church. This is the idea of anticlericalism rising once again.

For Westphal our 3 religion rejecters fit into either of these categories

Questions:

1. What is the Westphal’s Interpretation of Religion?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. What did modernism do and how is post modernism different? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. What contribution does the Westphals Interpretation of Religion?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Richard Dawkins

Populist critiques of religion

Some have attributed the creation of neo-atheism to the event of the 9/11 attacks in which many were killed and the perpetrators claimed the event occurred in the name of their religion, Islam. Also known as antitheists, these thinkers go further than simply believing that there is no God. They believe that religion should not be permitted in the public sphere and those who continue to believe in religion should be corrected wherever possible. Vocal examples of those who would be included within this group would be Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.

Dawkins' view of religion is very clear - he thinks religion is unreasonable. To some extent he agrees with Sigmund Freud, who also viewed religion as being unreasonable, but these two men were arguing from different bases. Freud argued that religion was a result of primal anxieties and the super ego's imposition. Dawkins argues from the basis of genetics. He argues that there is a primal need to understand the world, and what we have not yet understood about the world through science is explained by religion to make humans feel better. Both thinkers view religion as unreasonable and view science as the main way to approach a view of and navigation of the world. This is a fairly objective viewpoint which views the religious stance of looking at the world as being unreasonable. This is something that does not marry well with the postmodernist viewpoint of Westphal.

Westphal's view would oppose this as, in his postmodernist form of thought, he believed there to be no objective viewpoint of the world. To argue that science is the only way to understand the world is, in the postmodernist view, as invalid as arguing that religion is the only way to understand the world. In postmodernism, all viewpoints can be considered to be valid.

Agnosticism

Philosopher William L Rowe states, 'Agnosticism is the view that human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify either the belief that God exists or the belief that God does not exist' . Rowe, William L (1998). 'Agnosticism'. In Edward Craig. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-415-07310-3.

The term itself was first put forward by Thomas Henry Huxley in 1869. Agnosticism is a distinctly separate belief to the belief of atheism. While atheists firmly believe that there is no God, agnostics believe that there is not sufficient evidence for the belief or the unbelief in God. They do not believe in God, but they also do not believe that there is absolutely no God.

Mistakenly assumed to have had atheistic views, Charles Darwin actually identified himself as an agnostic in letters to a friend, stating that, 'I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God – I think that generally .. . an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind' Although he considered there to be evidence that there is no God, he himself actually refuted that believing in evolution and believing in God were mutually exclusive, stating that it would be 'absurd to doubt that a man might be an ardent theist and an evolutionist'. 'Lett er 12041- Darwin, C R to Fordyce, John, 7 May 1879' via Darwin Correspondence Project.

Questions:

1. Who is Richard Dawkins? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. What is Agnosticism?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Assessment Questions:

Explore the key features of Agnosticism. 8 mk

Explore one critique of religious belief. 8 mk

Assess the implications of Freuds views on religion and belief. 12 Mks

Assess the strengths and weaknesses of postmodernism. 12 Mks

Analyse the implications of Marx’s views on religion and belief. 20 Mks

Other Extension

1. Evaluate the view “the sociological critique” is successful in showing religious language to be meaningless.” 30 marks

2. Evaluate the view “religion is a delusion.” Discuss. 30 marks

3. Evaluate the view “The postmodern critique of religion is successful.” 30 marks

Exam Technique:

S: Support: Write a supporting argument, in detail, using technical terms and demonstrating thorough and accurate knowledge of the topic.

A: Analysis: Explain why your supporting argument could be flawed

N: Negate: Write an opposing argument, in detail, using technical terms and demonstrating thorough and accurate knowledge of the topic. You should also explain why your opposing argument could be flawed.

E: Evaluate: Explain your own judgement based on the arguments you have given to support or negate the quote. Come to a clear, justified, logical conclusion.

Remember, you are marked on two assessment objectives:

AO1: Select and demonstrate clearly relevant knowledge and understanding through the use of evidence, examples and correct language and terminology appropriate to the course of study.

AO2: Sustain a critical line of argument and justify a point of view

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Google Sites

Report abuse