Further to the below...
Jul. 7th, 2011 09:24 am... the point I'm making, for the terminally dim, is that religious belief is IRRELEVANT to whether you are actually concretely making the world a better place. People do good things while holding irrational belief systems and vice versa, as anyone who's actually involved in the social justice movements knows. Sometimes they do good because of those irrational belief systems. For example, those of you who believe that the Catholic Church is an "unmitigated" force of evil (as Prof Dawkins might say) might want to check out these guys.
Belief systems don't determine behaviour. If they did, small cults of the self-declared "enlightened" wouldn't have such a bad name, and you really could make the world a better place by wiping out the "bad" ideologies. All the evidence of history, on the other hand, indicates that this is bullshit. Belief systems grow out of existing patterns of behaviour, and existing patterns of behaviour exist because they make sense for survival in concrete socio-economic conditions. "Memes" only select between options of behaviour made possible by such conditions. Most of the time, belief systems (religious or otherwise) do nothing but provide excuses for patterns of behaviour which have already been determined by cultural and socio-economic forces.
This is, I believe, an impeccably materialist way to understand religion. Dawkinsite atheism which talks about religious "memes" as if they were independent living organisms - "mind viruses", if you will - that need to be wiped out like smallpox strikes me as nothing but rank superstition. Beliefs are nothing but cultural/psychological crystallisation of behaviour patterns which have a material basis. All beliefs, religious or otherwise, can go along with good and evil behaviour. Only by studying the material effects of such behaviour can you declare "good" or "evil", as I think a carpenter from Nazareth said.
(This rant inspired by recent atheist drama, or, to be more precise, people being shocked and appalled that atheists can act like sexist assholes, just like those nasty religionists.)
Belief systems don't determine behaviour. If they did, small cults of the self-declared "enlightened" wouldn't have such a bad name, and you really could make the world a better place by wiping out the "bad" ideologies. All the evidence of history, on the other hand, indicates that this is bullshit. Belief systems grow out of existing patterns of behaviour, and existing patterns of behaviour exist because they make sense for survival in concrete socio-economic conditions. "Memes" only select between options of behaviour made possible by such conditions. Most of the time, belief systems (religious or otherwise) do nothing but provide excuses for patterns of behaviour which have already been determined by cultural and socio-economic forces.
This is, I believe, an impeccably materialist way to understand religion. Dawkinsite atheism which talks about religious "memes" as if they were independent living organisms - "mind viruses", if you will - that need to be wiped out like smallpox strikes me as nothing but rank superstition. Beliefs are nothing but cultural/psychological crystallisation of behaviour patterns which have a material basis. All beliefs, religious or otherwise, can go along with good and evil behaviour. Only by studying the material effects of such behaviour can you declare "good" or "evil", as I think a carpenter from Nazareth said.
(This rant inspired by recent atheist drama, or, to be more precise, people being shocked and appalled that atheists can act like sexist assholes, just like those nasty religionists.)