tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post8804550974790317776..comments2024-03-19T07:48:54.021-06:00Comments on Gus Van Horn: Religion's Gordian KnotGus Van Hornhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-63697766686493883202007-11-08T08:07:00.000-06:002007-11-08T08:07:00.000-06:00Fixed.Thanks, Ron.Fixed.<BR/><BR/>Thanks, Ron.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-9486740398621204072007-11-08T07:18:00.000-06:002007-11-08T07:18:00.000-06:00Strange that with a blog doing so well in the poll...Strange that with a blog doing so well in the poll, none of your readers have informed you that the link to <I>The Ayn Rand Lexicon</I> contains a typo, missing the H in http.<BR/><BR/>Guess it takes a first time reader. O_oAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-10270380015845622062007-11-07T21:05:00.000-06:002007-11-07T21:05:00.000-06:00John: I am aware of conservatives' selectivity in ...John: I am aware of conservatives' selectivity in targetting Islam; the best they can do, given that they DON'T recognize any standard above faith, is to take issue with particular religions, *never* religion as such -- even if <I>religion as such</I> is the source of the problem.<BR/><BR/>I wasn't talking about conservatives per se; I was talking about moderate religious people. That process of confining faith by common sense is the remnant of the mechanism by which the Enlightenment tamed Christianity -- and THAT has been the SOLE reason why Christianity <I>of late</I> has been more respectable than Islam. Islam never had an Enlightenment (but they still fear that possibility something fierce).<BR/><BR/>One need merely look <A HREF="http://instapundit.com/archives2/011413.php" REL="nofollow">here</A> for a reminder of how even this sort of person is ultimately still no obstacle to the spread of religious power. They would call the erection of a Christian crucifix in Iraq a hopeful sign. I don't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-15542655884506101682007-11-07T19:57:00.000-06:002007-11-07T19:57:00.000-06:00Hmmm. Self-hatred, by one side of the coin for the...Hmmm. Self-hatred, by one side of the coin for the other!<BR/><BR/>Quip aside, that's also a good insight.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-56302057294994637202007-11-07T19:20:00.000-06:002007-11-07T19:20:00.000-06:00Gus writes:“In the current cultural debate over re...Gus writes:<BR/><BR/>“In the current cultural debate over religion, the new atheists err in throwing out the baby with the bathwater when they dismiss or show contempt for certain legitimate emotions and concepts that are traditionally associated with religion. But too often, when those who -- like Dalrymple -- realize this mistake reply, they make the same error he makes, which is to assume that there is no secular basis for the good things religion is an attempt to do. …”<BR/><BR/>This is a good insight that I had not paralleled before: the essential similarities between atheists, such as Hitchens, who say religion is the cause of all the world’s ills, and the religionists who say atheism deserves all to blame. I never made this parallel before because I don’t believe I’ve ever come across atheists who blame all the major negatives in our world on religion. <BR/><BR/>Of course, I’ve experienced my fare share of religionists who have faith that all evil evolves from non-believers. If God created the universe and is the giver of all moral laws, then to discard or not fear Him is to discard all morality; hence the existence of evil. <BR/><BR/>So what is it, then, that drives Hitchens and his atheistic ilk to regard religion as thoroughly rotten? If religion is, as Ayn Rand said, a primitive form of philosophy, then is that perhaps Hitchens target? In seeing nothing of value in religion, Hitchens does see that religion does provide a moral code, even if are wrong one, based on God-fearing commandments and faith? But at least it provides an ethics. What does Hitchens offer? While he has (supposedly) renounced socialism, seeing its history of economic bankruptcy and mass death, he can nevertheless not get away from advocating its ethics of altruism-collectivism. <BR/><BR/>I haven’t thought this issue through, nor have I read Hitchens book God Is Not Great, so I don’t think I can give an educated answer. Why do some atheists regard religion as having no value whatsoever, and see it as the cause of all the world’s ills? I hazard to speculate that it is because, like D’Souza and other religionists, they fail to see, nor want to see, the same fundamental that rule both of their philosophies, their altruistic ethics (each with a different end: God or “society”) and the faith-based grounds for their beliefs.Joseph Kellardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05792444138935346026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-87131966850337079092007-11-07T08:06:00.000-06:002007-11-07T08:06:00.000-06:00"Actually Jim the Conservative anti-Islam commenta..."Actually Jim the Conservative anti-Islam commentators I've read don't rely on an outside (ie rational) standard. They argue that Islam is more inherently evil than Judaism or Christianity."<BR/><BR/>Ah, but "inherantly" evil by <I>what standard</I>? I think Gus' point stands here, even with the extra layer added on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-62143532489707267392007-11-07T07:14:00.000-06:002007-11-07T07:14:00.000-06:00John,Not to take anything away from your very perc...John,<BR/><BR/>Not to take anything away from your very perceptive comments, but I think the conservatives do a little of both.<BR/><BR/>In the way they lead (most of) their lives, they smuggle in various degrees of rational behavior.<BR/><BR/>This also just happens to lend surface credibility to their contention that Christianity is less violent than Islam.<BR/><BR/>The point about Islam having some more dangerous doctrines (as it is preached now) than Christianity is trickier. This is true, but ultimately, there is no reason in a primacy-of-consciousness universe with a commandment-based morality not to wipe out infidels. I am sure Christianity would become much more like Islam in a very short time without the remainder of the Enlightenment around.<BR/><BR/>Religion is essentially irrational. THIS is its inherent danger and any doctrinal difference between religions that makes the average practitioner of one less dangerous than the practitioners of another is no more than a lucky break.<BR/><BR/>GusGus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-48257000833894460012007-11-07T02:27:00.000-06:002007-11-07T02:27:00.000-06:00"No, they are constraining their faith by an outsi..."No, they are constraining their faith by an outside standard. What do you suppose is the standard by which they draw that line?"<BR/><BR/>Actually Jim the Conservative anti-Islam commentators I've read don't rely on an outside (ie rational) standard. They argue that Islam is more inherently evil than Judaism or Christianity. Robert Spencer is the biggest example of this. His latest book is titled "Religion of Peace, Why Christianity Is and Islam Is Not." His main argument is that structurally (as relates to main doctrines) Jihad warfare is essential to Islam whereas there is no such overarching themes to New Testament Christianity. <BR/><BR/>Also, according to Spencer, Christianity preaches universality whereas Islam is a Supremacist ideology. Now whether these arguments are true or false is one thing. But Spencer and the majority of anti-Islam Conservatives I've read all make the same arguments. They really are differentiating the religions based on religious doctrines. <BR/><BR/>Incidentally, this is a trend which I think is very dangerous. The war against Islam is not being seen as a war against religion but a war against a violent religion, ie Islam. Religion is still seen as essentially good by these Conservatives (and with few exceptions - such as Hitchens - the only anti-Islam commentators today are Conservatives). <BR/><BR/>Add to that the fact that the Left (who they associate with atheists) are appeasers and enablers of Islamic Jihad and the Conservatives are developing an even greater dislike for atheists than existed before. In fact, I'm sensing a severe potential blowback against atheists in the making. That also is not good.<BR/><BR/>John KimAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-61511684038565380242007-11-06T22:15:00.000-06:002007-11-06T22:15:00.000-06:00Thanks. I just hope that one day, people will wond...Thanks. I just hope that one day, people will wonder why you once had to dig around on blogs to find someone saying something like this....Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-52626069993337640192007-11-06T22:01:00.000-06:002007-11-06T22:01:00.000-06:00Great article, Gus! And a very good one to have up...Great article, Gus! And a very good one to have up for the hopefully increased outside traffic from the awards. This is the kind of thing that <I>needs</I> to be seen and considered by the mainstream.<BR/><BR/>Well done!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-30064855095479837702007-11-06T21:46:00.000-06:002007-11-06T21:46:00.000-06:00"[S]uch people are reversing Kant."That is a very ..."[S]uch people are reversing Kant."<BR/><BR/>That is a very interesting observation, and very well put.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-13087908217950128492007-11-06T21:08:00.000-06:002007-11-06T21:08:00.000-06:00The implicit idea most people seem to have is to a...<I>The implicit idea most people seem to have is to accept the "good parts" of religion while ignoring the "bad parts", the various commands that would make it hard to live a pleasant or productive life (or worse).</I><BR/><BR/>This reminds me of something that struck me in the aftermath of 9/11, when there were many who, seeing that the attacks were perpetrated by religious killers, sought to justify their own continued adherence to religion by explaining that they "don't go to extremes" -- that is, they would point to the burning towers and say that "well, that's just crazy, that's taking religion too far. My faith does not go that far."<BR/><BR/>We all know that religion has no built-in restraints; what God says today he may change tomorrow, and accordingly, religion's history is caked with dried blood. <BR/><BR/>No, they are constraining their faith by an outside standard. What do you suppose is the standard by which they draw that line? If you ask them, their answers will essentially boil down to "common sense". "I don't approve of the crazy stuff" etc.<BR/><BR/>If you stop and think about it, such people are <B>reversing Kant</B> -- i.e. they are using <I>reason</I> in the form of "common sense" to <I>morally constrain</I> their faith!<BR/><BR/>It is within such subtle, weak echoes that the Enlightenment hangs on by its fingernails to this day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-38949398125182428382007-11-06T10:18:00.000-06:002007-11-06T10:18:00.000-06:00Thank you, sir! And I liked that one myself!Thank you, sir! <BR/><BR/>And I liked that one myself!Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-8815051384532803762007-11-06T10:16:00.000-06:002007-11-06T10:16:00.000-06:00Excellent essay! I especially love the phrase "fai...Excellent essay! I especially love the phrase "faith-forged chains of ignorance"!<BR/><BR/>GideonGideonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02806423185226885594noreply@blogger.com