Knocking Two Heads Together

[semper_augustus]

We live in a time when radical secularists will stop at nothing to advance their agenda. It is one thing to be indifferent toward religion, quite another to unleash an anti-religion crusade. This is exactly what the new atheism is all about-a dogmatic plundering of religion, especially Christianity, done in the name of tolerance. What makes Philip

Comments

[icewolf010]

*thundrous applause*

[semper_augustus]

Thank you! *takes a bow*

[eumelosdrizzle]

To quote JFK...

"We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."

You've given this a lot of thought, and I like it.

Perhaps Science/Technology/Liberty take on a the qualities of religion for the majority of people in the "Developed World". I think a larger problem that stems from the belief that technology solves all problems is that it is not only incorrect, but also overlooks the fact that the vast majority of the world are not seeing any benefits from the technological marvels you describe. In fact, most people are seeing things get worse while the minority live like Kings.

Science and Technology, and by extension the fanatical belief in its ability to reap untold benefits to a the chosen few, could definitely be seen as the "new religion".

[semper_augustus]

And yet, betraying its Christian origins, the faith in Technology and Liberty includes a belief that the benefits of Technology and Liberty should be open to all. We just can't yet do it. Much as all Religions have heretofore been unable to create its version of the Golden Age. It would be unfair to criticize it simply for that.

The question a Techno-Libertarian* would ask is, "Are we better at it than earlier religions?"

* I am not for a moment suggesting that this should be its name. It's an ugly name, but I needed something to call it.

[eumelosdrizzle]

Agreed. And like its counterpart in more conventional religion, there are definitely people who not only fervently hold that their belief has universal application, but also take real steps toward realizing that goal. So, I guess the criticism should properly be addressed at those who bask in their currently luxury at the expense of the majority comforted in their belief that someday all will reap the benefits bestowed by their techno-libertarian idols.

I really liked your post, its an essay in the truest spirit of the word - thought provoking and inviting furhter discussion and consideration of its thesis.

[semper_augustus]

It should also be addressed to those who believe that strict adherence to their One True Religion, no matter the cost, as a solution for all the world's problems. We are living in our own Age of Miracles, but the Age of Arrogance follows. Compare Tertullian to Ambrose.

[babelmusic]

I deeply applaud any and all attempts to get people to walk a bit in others' shoes.

However, I'd challenge/question whether you're not being a little strawman-ish in your attempt. You seem to be positing that the two factions - the secular and the religion - are divided primarily along lines of technology. This presumes that there are no religious believers who are also believers in technology, or that there are no Luddites who are also atheists. I do think your dividing line captures a major rift in society, but I think your points about Liberty strike more to the heart of the debate.

Personally, as an atheist, I get annoyed when I'm told that my belief system doesn't account for love, etc. Love is a HUGE part of it. There are numbers on both sides who have the same beliefs attributed to the other side, merely derived from a different source.

Somehwat nitpicky, as I'm sure you didn't intend to speak for All; but I do think it is the derivation, and not the belief, that is the real chasm.

[semper_augustus]

Not technology, but faith-in-technology. Faith in Science. And anyone who tells you that Religion has no faith in Reason should read Thomas Aquinas. The essay is mostly addressed to the attitude which wrote the quote at the beginning, i.e. the religiously minded who sees any deviation from Religion as evil. To be fair, I also wrote it to any militant atheist who believes that all Religion is illusion, deceit, and evil.

Quintus Aurelius Symmachus said to St.Ambrose, "The heart of so great a mystery cannot ever be reached by following one road only." If you agree with Symmachus's intent, even partially, the essay was not addressed to you.

[semper_augustus]

Believe you me, I would never mistake the opinions of a believer for the opinions of the Church/religion they belong to. Nor did I mean to suggest that the writer was a fundamentalist, only that one could say the sentence with that word and still mean it true

[alanscottevil]

thoughtprovoking and well-written.