John Gray on delusions.
One reads something and considers it an interesting perspective on a balance between theism and atheism.
Two days later, I read this absolute stunner of an excerpt from a book by John Gray. I don't know what to say. At an intuitive level, much of what he says makes immense sense.
Zealous atheism renews some of the worst features of ( Read more... )
Two days later, I read this absolute stunner of an excerpt from a book by John Gray. I don't know what to say. At an intuitive level, much of what he says makes immense sense.
Zealous atheism renews some of the worst features of ( Read more... )
Comments 5
"Belief in progress is a relic of the Christian view of history"
I've also heard people say that belief in progress is a function of the "linear" view of history of the Greeks(i.e., pagans). Either way, it basically means you are making a huge implicit assumption about 2/3rds of the world's population- that their belief in progress is basically because they came in contact with Christianity.
I did skim through that first link when you posted it. Looks interesting. Will comment on it, time willing.
>He recognises that, because humans have a universal tendency to religious belief, it must have had some evolutionary advantage
Not necessarily. It could be a relic of something that is no longer useful, like our appendix.
You may want to read this
Reply
My understanding of what his view is:
Christianity originally introduced the ideal of progress in terms of spiritual upliftment. The carrot at the end of the stick notion by proposing salvation as a goal of existence. With industrialization of the early 1900s and later, rational schemes of thought challenged this notion and espoused progress (in the material sense) minus the soul,spiritual part. The author believes that the idea of progress as an end - politically, ethically and socially - can be traced back to the notion that Christian doctrines originally proposed.
that their belief in progress is basically because they came in contact with Christianity.They need not have come into contact with Christianity personally to believe in progress. What he seems to be saying is that belief in progress as an end is itself questionable. And since different groups tend to view progress differently on social and ethical lines (check the article for examples), he ( ... )
Reply
Reply
will read both & comment later today
Reply
First impression is that the author is flogging the wrong horse. I don't think Gray is an apologist for religion. Gray's point is about identifying pitfalls similar to religion on the atheist,rational side and relate them to notions of progress that end up making control freaks out of groups irrespective of their belief in religion or lack of it.
Science, no doubt, is a powerful tool and rational thought helps. But Gray's point is that science gaining credence in the world at the expense of religious irrationality has nothing to do with the notion that the world is becoming a better place - socially and ethically. If anything people still die and wars are going on - not just in the name of religion, if you ask me. He's questioning the very edifice of progress on which such assumptions are based. I find his scheme of thought intriguing, would definitely like to read up more. Maybe I'll write when I've read enough of him. Writing him off as a rambling apologist is too extreme, though.
Reply
Leave a comment