A certain amount of boosterism is inherent in all of humanity. Everyone wants to be proud of who and what they are, and as such people will believe in the "rightness" of everything they do. People will support anything because it's their "team" - something that was part of their family, their community, their culture.
But, while at first glance that sounds awful - supporting a cause for no reason other than it's what they grew up with - one realizes that such institutions as family, community, culture are institutions that have their own experiences and are repositories of that shared history. That isn't to say simply echoing the sentiments with which you were raised is always valid, but it isn't meritless either. And, as such, can reflect wisdom beyond that which the individual is capable. So while the methodology might drive one nuts, the belief may have value.
Take, for instance, Jewish dietary laws. I remember a scene from the movie "Raid on Entebbe" where a Jewish man notes the differences in health of a group of Orthodox Jews and the rest of the people they are with. He remarks that when he is in Israel or another "civilized" country, he isn't Kosher, but anywhere else, he follows the dietary laws. The Orthodox Jews and other observant Jews do this because (setting aside theology) it's an integral part of their culture. It reflects the shared wisdom of a group of people over the generations.
Obviously this can obviously take a bad turn as well - the examples are legion. But whom has the greater wisdom - the 1930's Nazi scientist arguing eugenics, or the American layman arguing the grade-school trope that "all men are created equal"? Not every American is Abraham Lincoln, but his ideas have become important to our society, and is the shared heritage of us all. So, too, is the heritage of the worlds religions. I may not be Martin Luther, but I am the product of what my family, my community, and my culture have learned from him.
Do I fully understand everything that I believe? No, in honesty, I do not. But what I have learned throughout life hasn't led me to decide that what I was given from my upbringing to be fundamentally flawed, so I continue to believe it. And through that faith in my family, my community, and my culture, I feel I am wiser than I would be were I a pure skeptic.
Well put. I agree that cultures can be a repository of wisdom that's beyond what a single individual can do. I'm advocating for calling it what it is though. Cultural wisdom is cultural wisdom, not objective truth. The dogma aspect of religions isn't cultural wisdom, it's trying to be something that it's not. It's not objective fact (like saying Adam and Eve are the birth of all humanity instead of evolution, they weren't). But that same honesty applies to science as well. Science studies what is. It can't comment at all on what ought to be, what's good, what's moral, what's beautiful. In that way science can also be dogmatic, if it tries to be something that it's not.
Well, granted, theology isn't science, but I don't think those that advocate young-earth creationism (for the record, I'm an old-earth creationist) are advocating Genesis as science, and are more than willing to embrace science so long as it doesn't lead to a contradiction with theology. In a strictly abstract sense, that's no different than a scientist rejecting a theological position because it contradicts his scientific findings. If the contradiction can't be resolved, it comes down to which matters most to you.
And that's where the problem is really at. For many, they don't see any way to resolve the contradiction between Christian theology and scientific evolution. You can have empty sentiments like that of that of Drummond in Inherit the Wind, believing the two can be reconciled (and, in truth, I think they can), but unless there is either some theological or scientific heavy lifting to reconcile the two, the sentiment is hollow.
So you can say that both science and religion have their different spheres, but it's not that clean. Both have elements that impact the other, and there are consequences of that interaction.
I've listened (audiobook) to Ken Wilber's The Marriage of Sense and Soul. I highly recommend it. His four quadrants, holistic theory, and differentiate/integrate theory have given me the framework I need to begin to address the issue of the different spheres you spoke about above. It's been eye opening and profound for me, it may be of use to you.
Click to view
But, while at first glance that sounds awful - supporting a cause for no reason other than it's what they grew up with - one realizes that such institutions as family, community, culture are institutions that have their own experiences and are repositories of that shared history. That isn't to say simply echoing the sentiments with which you were raised is always valid, but it isn't meritless either. And, as such, can reflect wisdom beyond that which the individual is capable. So while the methodology might drive one nuts, the belief may have value.
Take, for instance, Jewish dietary laws. I remember a scene from the movie "Raid on Entebbe" where a Jewish man notes the differences in health of a group of Orthodox Jews and the rest of the people they are with. He remarks that when he is in Israel or another "civilized" country, he isn't Kosher, but anywhere else, he follows the dietary laws. The Orthodox Jews and other observant Jews do this because (setting aside theology) it's an integral part of their culture. It reflects the shared wisdom of a group of people over the generations.
Obviously this can obviously take a bad turn as well - the examples are legion. But whom has the greater wisdom - the 1930's Nazi scientist arguing eugenics, or the American layman arguing the grade-school trope that "all men are created equal"? Not every American is Abraham Lincoln, but his ideas have become important to our society, and is the shared heritage of us all. So, too, is the heritage of the worlds religions. I may not be Martin Luther, but I am the product of what my family, my community, and my culture have learned from him.
Do I fully understand everything that I believe? No, in honesty, I do not. But what I have learned throughout life hasn't led me to decide that what I was given from my upbringing to be fundamentally flawed, so I continue to believe it. And through that faith in my family, my community, and my culture, I feel I am wiser than I would be were I a pure skeptic.
Reply
Reply
And that's where the problem is really at. For many, they don't see any way to resolve the contradiction between Christian theology and scientific evolution. You can have empty sentiments like that of that of Drummond in Inherit the Wind, believing the two can be reconciled (and, in truth, I think they can), but unless there is either some theological or scientific heavy lifting to reconcile the two, the sentiment is hollow.
So you can say that both science and religion have their different spheres, but it's not that clean. Both have elements that impact the other, and there are consequences of that interaction.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment