ideology

After several months of reading books on evolution, I’d like to say that “I am an ideologue no more.” Whether it’s possible to entirely eliminate a previous ideology remains to be seen. It’s easier to talk and write about, for sure.

What do I mean by ideology? Daniel Dennett in Breaking The Spell identifies ideology as “not just any mistaken thinking, but thinking that is pathological or bad for us in some way.” (p.374--the complete title of this book is Breaking The Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon) In this same book, J.M Balkin is quoted as identifying ideology as “ways of thinking that help maintain unjust social conditions.” (p.374) These definitions will do for now.

Balkin, in his book Cultural Software, identifies something which he calls imperialist universalism: “…the view that there are universal concrete standards of justice and human rights that apply to every society, whether pre- or post-industrial, whether secular or religious, and that it is the duty of right-minded people to change the positive norms and institutions of all societies so that they conform with these universal norms of justice and universal human rights.” (p.150) I don't think that he is saying this as a positive thing. In times past I would have agreed with this idea.

Dennett also notes that many people in the United States hold the belief that the American way is the right way and we should spread it to all the world. Anything less is moral relativism. Tolerance of other cultures’ norms such as polygamy, slavery, and infanticide (to name a few) must not be granted. Imperialist Universalism sees “right” or “wrong” as the only accepted possibilities in any moral decision.

Many Muslims, Christians, and Hindus would seem to fall into this imperialist universalism category. They would agree that moral relativism is unacceptable. Where does this leave the unbeliever? Does it automatically push the unbeliever into the morally relativistic camp? I don’t think so, but the “I’m right and you’re wrong” stance won't work either. There has to be some middle ground. Scientists (many of whom admit to being unbelievers) also should not be granted final say. Science doesn’t possess moral answers to life exclusively. At best, science may provide clarity or confirmation of factual presuppositions of any moral discussion, but not the values that our ethical judgments and arguments are based on. Putting faith in science alone is no different than putting faith in one religion or another exclusively. (paraphrased from Dennett)

“Everybody should consider adopting the stable middle ground: an open mind stance that permit’s a rational dialogue to engage the issues between people, no matter how radically different their cultural backgrounds. We can engage in this conversation with some reasonable hope of resolution that isn‘t simply a matter of one culture overwhelming the other by brute force. We cannot expect, Balkin argues, to persuade others if we leave no room and opportunity for them to persuade us. Success does depend on the participants‘ truth and justice. What this means is only that both parties accept that these values are inescapably presupposed by human projects that we all participate in, simply by being alive: the projects of staying alive, and staying secure. Nothing more parochial need be assumed, and even ‘Martians‘ should be able to agree on this.” (Dennett, p.376, Breaking The Spell)

What am I saying? I think that whether we’re talking about science or religion, neither are benefited by claiming an imperialist universalism stance. Dialogue is necessary when it comes to differences. We all share the need to stay alive and stay secure. Pushing or simply holding an ideology causes separation. It causes us to devalue others. We judge others and develop feelings of entitlement, superiority, and pride. Isn’t this how wars start and continue?

Holding strongly to one ideology over another leads to irrationality. My truth is no truer than your truth and vice versa if we‘ve failed to present our cases in open dialogue with each other. Winning arguments by strong arming the other out of the dialogue is not winning. And if one thinks his ideology should rule, he needs to study his tactics and learn peaceable approaches to dialogue. If we rely on the respect for truth and the tools of truth-finding, “we can work together toward mutually comprehended and accepted visions of what is good and what is just”(Dennett).

For many years my religious views cut me off from ideas that I was taught to ostracize and deem as untruth. I'm no longer in agreement with this ideology. Learning and growing in new ways it what I require of myself today. My need to stay alive and stay secure are more important than any ideology's promise.

recap

At year's end I should have something to say, I suppose. Flipping the calendar from one year to the next is a good time to review the past and plan for the future.

Two thousand nine has witnessed a couple of events that I would mark as important. Probably the most significant personally, after nearly three years of search and study, is that I no longer see religion as something with significant meaning in my life. I cannot expunge a lifetime of religion from my life nor do I desire to do so, but I've decided to eliminate it from my day to day living. Whether or not there is a God is something I am not able to determine. Frankly, no one ever has. It is simply an indeterminable fact whether God exists or not and that is okay with me. I'm finding life meaningful in venues that are not religiously related.

Family wise we experienced the college graduation of our oldest son. Our second son continues working with his dad in business, the third continues in his studies of music and linguistics, while the youngest abides at home with her mom. Our studies of algebra, science, history, grammar, etc. continue. (We really do have a lot of fun.)

I thought I’d note my book list for 2009. It tells a part of my journey. This year I read: Taking Flight, The Way To Love, and Awareness by Anthony De Mello; The Power of Now and A New Earth by Eckhart Tolle; Loving What Is by Byron Katie; Summerhill School by A.S. Neill; The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins; Billions and Billions by Carl Sagan; A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking; Christianity Before Christ by John G. Jackson; Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel C. Dennett.

My “To Read List“, a few of which I've already started includes: The Greatest Show On Earth by Richard Dawkins; Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne; The Demon-haunted World by Carl Sagan; How We Believe and Why Darwin Matters by Michael Shermer; What I Believe by Bertrand Russell; Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond; The End of Faith and Letter To A Christian Nation by Sam Harris; and a few more. That should pretty much take care of 2010.

My increased thirst for knowledge and understanding came after many years of getting along and not rocking the boat. Five years ago my life support systems failed. I’ve had to redo so many things. Determined not to build upon the same foundations, here I am today living a different sort of life. It is a happier life, a more fulfilled life in many ways. Fragments of the past surface from time to time, but I’m gradually laying to rest the former illusions and presuppositions. It is a wonderful life and 2010 will no doubt bring more surprises my way… looking forward to it.

change

"Are you willing to be sponged out, erased, canceled, made nothing? Are you willing to be made nothing? Dipped into oblivion? If not, you will never really change." D.H. Lawrence

"When you’re finished changing, you’re finished." Benjamin Franklin

"Faced with changing one's mind, or proving that there is no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof." John Kenneth Galbraith

"Security is mostly superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing. To keep our faces toward change and behave like free spirits in the presence of fate is strength undefeatable." Helen Keller

"Things do not change; we change." Henry David Thoreau

live honestly

In the past five years, I've attempted to turn heaps of disillusionment into a revitalized belief in God. That goal has not been successful. I wrote the following last week, after at least one other longer rendition, and am now ready to post...

I’ve been doing what my blog name says. I’ve taken another look into many different arenas of life and the fear that I feel when I think of telling others what is happening inside me today is swirling in circles in my gut. I am afraid to be open and afraid to not be open. My past “lifestyle of the religious and righteous” for years taught me well how not to be open. But I no longer have the need to be religiously righteous. I am growing up. I will manage my life, thank you, please.

On the other hand, why be open in a world that doesn’t seem to care. I suppose that exposing myself is like all the rest of life… a risk. Diving off the 10 meter platform would have a similar effect I suppose. Whether I could surface, assuming I would survive the impact, seems unlikely. But by me never trying to elucidate these new understandings seems even worse. Therefore, I continue…

An about-face 180 degrees is how I view most things these days. Not an easy task considering I’ve already lived most of my life. If there’s another life, I know nothing about it. It’s never been proven to me, empirically, to be fact. My certainty in eternity has been exposed as nothing more than wishful thinking. It’s something about which I just do not know. One book is no longer sufficient evidence for me.

The idea of a "God" has been on my list also. I’ve never seen this God, heard this God, felt this God, tasted this God, or smelled this God. I know that others will say there is a God and that they have experienced him. I have no criticism of that. Everyone’s experience is their experience. I said the same for many years. The God that I thought existed makes no sense to me anymore. I can wish for a God to be true, but wishing is just that… wishing. If the God that I had created internally was a reality, it could have proven to me its existence during these searching years. To be clear, I’m not saying that there isn’t a God. There could be. Just not one I can conceive of. I can’t and won’t attach a label such as atheist or agnostic to myself. Labels are inadequate. I suppose I’m an unbeliever of sorts. But even that is insufficient.

Living life honestly is what I want to do more than anything else… honesty in thought, speech, and relationship with others. If there is a core from which life can be lived, honesty and reality would be mine. In these I have hope for a better life.

have you ever believed a myth?

Am working daily to dislodge the hook, line, and sinker in my stomach... annoying at times, but mostly enlightening.

reorganizing

Three weeks later...

The battle is over. Evolution won. Now what? Reorganizing beliefs can be so messy...

dupery begone

Thomas Jefferson, one of the most influential founders of the United States, said:

"The priests of the different religious sects . . . dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight, and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subdivision of the duperies on which they live."

Perhaps this explains the seeming lack of intellect in creationists who debate their case against the scientists of today in the creation/evolution debate we have in America. Certainly there are many very smart people arguing for creation, but their arguments don't come in at the same level of scientific methodology presented by evolutionists. Do they see the writing on the wall and argue out of fear? Or have they so convinced themselves that they would somehow be less human if evolution were true and then it would threaten their worldview or the plans of their god or perhaps even the existence of their god? (Warning: Bombshell ahead!) (Why use small "g" in god? I'm implying simply that perhaps their "god" doesn't really exist. Anyway... not the one they've created in their theologies.)

The next generation of children could determine the direction of this issue. We see the battle for the minds of these young people, beginning in elementary school through high school into college, if they make it that far. If college doesn't happen, I regret that they may be only getting half of the story.

My opinion... educate the parents. The local churches and in turn the local schools through high school bend toward creationism. One view is propagated in the society effectively. It's up to parents to take the issue seriously. Get online and educate yourself. Help your children decide with integrity of mind and thought, once the facts are in, which is correct. Either way, duperies (acts, practices, or instances of duping) need to be extinguished.