Comments on Shuck and Jive: What is Religion?

@Jodie Whoever and whatever God is, religion i...

2012-01-28T11:21:30.949-05:00
@Jodie

Whoever and whatever God is, religion is the natural reaction we, the self aware element of the Universe, have when we get in touch with God.

Nice!

"When someone says to me that science cannot ...

2012-01-28T01:30:31.920-05:00
"When someone says to me that science cannot explain everything..." how do they know that? Maybe eventually it can.

(I just read in the news that science can now confirm and maybe explain why conservatives are stupid racists!)

"The amazing thing is that the universe has evolved consciousness"

More amazing to me is that it has evolved self awareness. It can look at itself and say to itself "you are gorgeous, baby"

The Universe may actually be narcissistic!

Whoever and whatever God is, religion is the natural reaction we, the self aware element of the Universe, have when we get in touch with God.

The question might be, why did the Universe evolve such a trait? Self awareness I can almost get. But religion? Por Qua?

I am not saying that the task of religion can be e...

2012-01-27T22:45:10.137-05:00
I am not saying that the task of religion can be established scientifically.

We can debate openly and publicly my statements on the task of religion or the human project.

They are my opinions. I claim no supernatural authority or special revelation for them. They rise or fall on their merit and whether or not I am persuasive.

What I suggest is that religion use as its sources for meaning what we learn from public knowledge as opposed to special revelation.

I further suggest that we engage in the manner of public discourse (ie. reason) rather than make appeals to our special revelation (ie. God's Word) as a source for authority.

"I think the task of religion is to further t...

2012-01-27T19:13:06.536-05:00
"I think the task of religion is to further the possibility of survival of the human species and to preserve our ecosystem for future generations."

I think so, too. Or, at least, I think that's part of what religion is about.

The difference is, I know for a fact that such "task" cannot be established scientifically, or, in your terminology, as a matter of public information. It is not a testable or falsifiable proposition.

"The amazing thing is that the universe has evolved consciousness. We are it. We are literally the universe's eyes, ears, and thoughts. That is valuable. Far more valuable than we may realize. It is worth preserving."

Again, if those are meaningful scientific or public statements, how do you propose that they be tested to determine their truth or falsehood? They are assertions of value. I happen to agree with them. In fact, in my judgment, they are in some sense re-statements of Christian revelation. And though they may become, with skillful advocacy, the basis for considerable concerted human effort, I don't see how, in any sense, they can be called scientific, or even "public," in your sense (excepting the part containing the factual proposition that we have senses).