[Vision2020] Arrogant Dogmatism, Faith & Science

[Joe Campbell]

Ted,

I appreciate your comments. I don't feel comfortable talking about the details of my own 
religious views, in part because often my words are quoted out of context on Dale's 
website and then ridiculed. But even if there were no Dale, I still wouldn't feel 
comfortable talking about the details in a public forum.

In general, I'm against fear-based, dogmatic forms of religious belief. But I don't see 
much connection between faith, in the way I understand it, and fear-based, dogmatic 
forms of religious belief. I won't deny that fear-based, dogmatic forms of religious belief 
are common but even in our town only about 1,000 out of 20,000 or so people can be 
characterized in this way. Most of the religious people I know are tolerant and humble.

Also, why think that faith gets in the way of understanding the world from a scientific 
point of view? I don’t see it that way. 

Best, Joe

---- Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> wrote: 

=============
Joe wrote:


>  This is especially
> irritating since her beliefs are the product of faith, and it is hard to
> see how faith could
> ever support arrogant dogmatism. I'm annoyed too because I'm a Christian
> and some
> people – Paul for instance – seem to think that idiotic arrogance typifies
> Christian belief.


Perhaps by your finely parsed definition of "faith," you are correct, but
millions of the "faithful" are supported in what I would certainly call
"arrogant dogmatism" by their "faith," as they interpret it.  Millions of
Christians and Muslims believe absolutely that their particular
interpretations of the Bible or the Koran are the unquestionable truth, and
based on this belief, support extremist views, whether it be that martyrdom
assures a place in heaven after death, that gays are to be stoned, women are
second class citizens, that the science regarding evolution is to be
disregarded, or that the Earth's ecosystems are merely a disposable stage
for the enactment of a cosmic drama that soon will end with the Second
Coming.

I think Paul's point about religious dogmatism based on what some believe to
be commands from the creator of the universe is valid.  Beliefs of this sort
lend themselves to arrogant dogmatism if wholeheartedly passionately
followed, because they induce an unquestioning certainty that reduces the
skepticism that might otherwise temper extremism.  I question my fundamental
beliefs often.  The religious fundamentalist full of "faith" that God is
commanding them to act in a certain way I doubt engages in the systematic
questioning of knowledge and belief that a philosopher pursues.

I am curious as to how you define your beliefs as a Christian?  I would not
bother to ask, but given you have made an issue of your beliefs in this
matter... Do you believe Christ is
"divine," the Son of God, and rose from the dead, someday to return to
Earth, as many Christians believe?  Why do you call yourself a Christian,
and not a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Wiccan or an agnostic, etc?  While I do
not believe I can honestly call myself a Christian without believing at the
very least in the "Divinity of Christ," my respect for many of the teachings
and ethical examples Christ manifested, that are reported in the New
Testament, might allow a declaration that I am a follower of Christ's
teachings, along with following other wise enlightened teachers, of which I
could name quite a few.

I thought I should add, to clarify what seems like a misunderstanding by
some, that my spiritual focus on Nature I do not regard as a "Faith."  There
is no ideological system, as we usually understand a "religion" to
represent, behind this point of view.  I do not think, for example, that a
coherent system of Ethics can be derived from observing or worshipping
Nature.  There is much "cruelty" in the natural world that I would not want
to see emulated by human beings toward each other.  And the natural world
could just as well cause our complete extinction as a species, without so
much as blinking, as continue to be our sustainable home in the universe.

I regard this spiritual focus on Nature as primarily science, reason and
fact based, though I believe "spiritual" experiences connected to the
natural world can be just as meaningful as other forms of religious
experience.  We evolved on Earth, the Earth's ecosystems are critical to our
survival, deserving of our kind attention and conservation for our very
existence.  This belief I think is primarily based on following what the
world of science has revealed, not dictates from any book of revealed
truths, or visions from the beyond.  And following the discoveries of
science, I do not see any substantial evidence we are going to be saved by
any beings or being from any spiritual realm, that there is a personal
afterlife after the death of the body, or that advanced alien intelligences
from other solar systems might come to our rescue.  I suppose we could call
accepting the scientific method as a "faith" of sorts, but this is not what
is usually meant by those who take a book like the Bible or Koran, claiming
it is the literal word of the one creator of the universe, on faith, and
then act accordingly.

Ted Moffett