Religion
Related: About this forumHow do religions die?
Do they waste away, or get conquered by something better? Perhaps it is easier to think in terms of gods dying, rather than religions
Religion under attack: Hernan Cortez with 200 Spaniards and 5,000 Indians defeats a larger Aztec force in 1520. Illustration:Archivo Iconografico/Corbis
Andrew Brown
theguardian.com, Monday 30 September 2013 04.59 EDT
If religions are born, they must also be able to die. How does this happen? I think we can discount at once the idea that it happens because people realise that science is better. It's obvious that the more people try to replace religion with science, the more they reproduce the worst features of organised religion.
On the other hand, societies might be reconfigured in such a way that the idea of religion made no sense. Interestingly, the reverse process seems to have happened in Japan in the 19th century, after American gunboats broke the country's isolation. According to a recent book from Chicago University Press, there had been until then no concept of "religion" in Japanese society; afterwards, as part of the modernisation, some social practices and beliefs had to be carved out as "religious" while others were classified as "non-religious". I don't know how this account might apply to the spread of Christianity in the 17th century, and then the murderous suppression over generations; I'll have to wait for the book to arrive. But the process seems a plausible one, and something like it may be under way in the "secularising" parts of the world today.
But what is happening there is less of an abandonment of doctrine as a withdrawal of assent from things formerly considered sacred. This is a process as general and impersonal as language change. Nor is it any more driven by rationality. Considered in themselves, there is nothing more "religious" about a teddy bear left out in the rain by the roadside than there is about a man wearing a white lace-trimmed frock. Yet the teddy bear at the site of a road crash is recognised as a meaningful symbol of our horror at mortality, while the young man in a cotta is no longer a priest linking us to the heart of our civilisation but callow and pretentious.
One hundred years ago, the situation would have been completely absurd, a reversal of the natural order of the universe. It's certainly impossible to describe it as progress. It is simply change evolution, if you like.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/30/how-do-religions-die
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)"...reproduce the worst features of organised religion."
I don't know how this is obvious, or even factual, sounds completely made up to me.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,295 posts)He comes up with nonsense week after week, without justification, or just plain wrong, and publishes it, seemingly to generate a barrage of "you're an idiot" comments. Which all count as website hits, I suppose.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)mostly from the title alone, and misconstrued the book.
I'm delving deeper now, this should be funny.
BlueToTheBone
(3,747 posts)6 million women were murdered in horrible ways so that people would say "God the Father."
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)People stop believing in them.
rug
(82,333 posts)dimbear
(6,271 posts)"The Sea of Faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furl'd.
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
Retreating, to the breath
Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear
And naked shingles of the world."
Dover Beach, of course.
rug
(82,333 posts)To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.
Dover Beach, of course.
There's always Gerard Manley Hopkins to consider.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)to not having read the source, an odd admission. I'm pretty sure the Japanese state was aware of "religion" as a concept, since they seem to have passed various laws regarding religion during the 1000 years preceding the alleged "opening by gunboat" in the 19th century.
struggle4progress
(118,273 posts)corresponding word in another. I'm no expert on Japanese culture, history, or language but there's no obvious reason that the Japanese would necessarily have had a concept directly corresponding to our notion "religion" in the seventeenth century -- and in fact Western European notions of "religion" at the time might have differed considerably from the modern notion