Religion's obsolescenence as moral guide

[pellegrino]

You've reminded me of another little-known word:

to a tee.

[Non Sequitur]

I don't think the scenario above would describe "morality," so much as utilitarianism, even if the acts resulting from utilitarian decisions resemble acts undertaken by a person motivated by morality.

Isn't a fear of God's punishment just another form of utilitarianism? I don't see a lot of difference between not stealing so you don't offend God and not stealing because you don't want to go to jail. What people call morality, I just call behavior. We're all motivated by different thing. I don't do bad things because it makes me feel crappy when I do. We're all born with a measure of goodness and empathy. Nobody teaches us to love our kids, we just do. It's our nature. When I left the Church my nature didn't change, just a few of my habits.

[Sleeping in EQ]

[quote=SeattleUte;831430]

Let’s define our terms. How do you define modernization? Here is how I do: representative government with incorruptible free elections; Western-style human rights and civil liberties protections including a free press, Western-style prosperity including a robust middle class, essentially universal literacy, liberal access to higher education, substantial female access and participation in the work force. (I agree with Nicholas Kristof that a litmus test for modernization is the status of women.)

I don't put much stock in your definition of modernization. I can say "why," if you are interested in a detailed explanation.

As for my definition of modernization:

1) Modernization is dialectical.

2) Modernization is concerned with order, arrangement, and what Weber refers to as "the active orientation to mastery."

3) Modernization is rooted in the fact that human habits of order precede the ordering habits of less biological mechanisms.

4) Modernization places the zweckrational (zweck means "aim, goal, or purpose") in tension with the wertrational (wert means "value.).

5) Modernization encourages tensions between small-scale association and large-scale organization, personal autonomy and institutional regulation, and remote control and local intervention (as per Mumford, 1964).

6) Modernization involves the technological micromanagement of society.

7. Modernization involves the economic micromanagement of society.

8) Modernization encourages both progress and catastrophe.

9) Modernization commodifies information.

I could keep going, but Walter Lippmann's quote from 1922 sums up many of the dialectical tensions at the core of modernization. He says that, "The rate at which reason, as we possess it, can advance itself is slower than the rate at which action has to be taken,“ (p. 260)

Based on this definition how many places in the world are truly modern? Religion seems to be strongest in places, including the U.S., that per my definition are, well, not so modern. Correct? Anyone who concluded that the entire world would “modernize” and secularize in the foreseeable future was smoking crack. The inability of most of the world to effectively modernize is the problem of our age and probably a problem for the ages. Apparenlty some of your authorities did because they changed their minds by 1997. Religion will wane as modernization per my definition progresses, if it does.

As I said above, I don't find your notion of modernization adequate.

The economic theory of religion is not even mildly interesting. In Western Europe state support for religion means some funds for the old churches and cathedrals because they are recognized as national treasures, like our national parks or DC monuments, in the UK the royal family are Anglican, crucifixes still appear in Italian public classrooms and courts I hear. However, there is free exercise of religion in those countries. You can’t possibly contend that Mormons and Evangelicals are cowed by the formally official status of certain old religions in Western Europe. Yet they are not thriving there. It’s not because government won’t tolerate them. It’s because the populace is not interested. The same is true with the formally dominant religious traditions.

People who study and publish at the intersection of religion and modernization find the economic theory of religion interesting. Your points here are valid, and have been addressed by scholars in the field. Perhaps if I have some time I'll look up an article and link to it.

[SeattleUte]

I don't put much stock in your definition of modernization. I can say "why," if you are interested in a detailed explanation.

As for my definition of modernization:

1) Modernization is dialectical.

2) Modernization is concerned with order, arrangement, and what Weber refers to as "the active orientation to mastery."

3) Modernization is rooted in the fact that human habits of order precede the ordering habits of less biological mechanisms.

4) Modernization places the zweckrational (zweck means "aim, goal, or purpose") in tension with the wertrational (wert means "value.).

5) Modernization encourages tensions between small-scale association and large-scale organization, personal autonomy and institutional regulation, and remote control and local intervention (as per Mumford, 1964).

6) Modernization involves the technological micromanagement of society.

7. Modernization involves the economic micromanagement of society.

8) Modernization encourages both progress and catastrophe.

9) Modernization commodifies information.

I could keep going, but Walter Lippmann's quote from 1922 sums up many of the dialectical tensions at the core of modernization. He says that, "The rate at which reason, as we possess it, can advance itself is slower than the rate at which action has to be taken,“ (p. 260)




As I said above, I don't find your notion of modernization adequate.



People who study and publish at the intersection of religion and modernization find the economic theory of religion interesting. Your points here are valid, and have been addressed by scholars in the field. Perhaps if I have some time I'll look up an article and link to it.

Fair enough. You would say that Saudi Arabia is modern. Therefore, we don't seem to disagree once we understand our respective definitions. I agree that there is no prospect of religion becoming unimportant in Saudi Arabia.

But this raises two questions. First, what does this matter to conflicted religious people in the United States or even the future of religion in our country? To Mormons, including people who frequent this board?

Second, your point would be a morally bankrupt rationalization for religion's vitality. My definition has all the attributes of what I consider to be a progressive, healthy society.

Here is a good rejoinder to your defense of religion:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/23/wo...?smid=pl-share

This is religion's workmanship in the remaining "modern" countries where religion still latters a lot.

My point is that as societies progress they lose touch with religion. Do we need to define progress?

[calicoug]

Isn't a fear of God's punishment just another form of utilitarianism? I don't see a lot of difference between not stealing so you don't offend God and not stealing because you don't want to go to jail. What people call morality, I just call behavior. We're all motivated by different thing. I don't do bad things because it makes me feel crappy when I do. We're all born with a measure of goodness and empathy. Nobody teaches us to love our kids, we just do. It's our nature. When I left the Church my nature didn't change, just a few of my habits.

Perhaps, but there are many religious traditions that don't focus on fear of God as the motivation- rather it is love of God that drives behavior.

I can't help but imagine that if there is no God, we are all just colonizing ants with fun toys all soon to be forgotten and turned to dust. That just feels so... Pointless. For a universe as spectacular and inspiring as the one we see, one with no beginning and no end, life with an ability to reason on this little rock is far too miraculuous for me to reduce it to something so trite and useless.

[UtahDan]

Perhaps, but there are many religious traditions that don't focus on fear of God as the motivation- rather it is love of God that drives behavior.

I can't help but imagine that if there is no God, we are all just colonizing ants with fun toys all soon to be forgotten and turned to dust. That just feels so... Pointless. For a universe as spectacular and inspiring as the one we see, one with no beginning and no end, life with an ability to reason on this little rock is far too miraculuous for me to reduce it to something so trite and useless.

Don't take this the wrong way, but that is evidence of your ego not of anything supernatural.

[calicoug]

Don't take this the wrong way, but that is evidence of your ego not of anything supernatural.

I'm not arguing it is evidence of anything at all. More an explanation of why I can't comprehend the concept of nothingness after life.

I am interested in the implications of what it means to believe there is nothing after life. I am also struggling to think it would have no significant change on behavior or attitudes if one were to think there is nothing after life.

[RobinFinderson]

I am interested in the implications of what it means to believe there is nothing after life. I am also struggling to think it would have no significant change on behavior or attitudes if one were to think there is nothing after life.

Personally, I find it comforting. We each have our turn, we make our contribution, and then we live on (relatively briefly) in the memory of our loved ones. It means this life is incredibly precious, and yes, that does affect my attitudes and behavior.

[UtahDan]

I'm not arguing it is evidence of anything at all. More an explanation of why I can't comprehend the concept of nothingness after life.

I am interested in the implications of what it means to believe there is nothing after life. I am also struggling to think it would have no significant change on behavior or attitudes if one were to think there is nothing after life.

I think the change is profound. I think it makes you value this experience even more, makes you less willing to shrug your shoulders at injustice (God will make it right one day thinking), more willing to experience all kinds of things, more willing to change your mind when new evidence appears, more inclined to feel like you need to get this one shot right. That is how I see many (but certainly not all) people experiencing it. That doesn't mean you can't get many of those things through a belief in the supernatural, desire for reward/fear of punishment, etc. But the belief that religious people are more moral is, in my opinion, an ignorant one.

[calicoug]

I think the change is profound. I think it makes you value this experience even more, makes you less willing to shrug your shoulders at injustice (God will make it right one day thinking), more willing to experience all kinds of things, more willing to change your mind when new evidence appears, more inclined to feel like you need to get this one shot right. That is how I see many (but certainly not all) people experiencing it. That doesn't mean you can't get many of those things through a belief in the supernatural, desire for reward/fear of punishment, etc. But the belief that religious people are more moral is, in my opinion, an ignorant one.

I can see that, but I can also see the opposite occurring- needing to enjoy life no matter the cost to anyone else precisely because ultimately it doesn't matter and all will be forgotten. Emphasize pleasure (short term) over joy (long term). Obviously this doesn't mean that I think non-religious people are going to always be less "moral" than religious folks- experience has clearly shown that not to be the case.

I'm curious, though, from the way you phrase your comment- are you falling more and more into the non-believer camp these days? Your post seems to have more than a hint of experience with this issue. Believe me when I say I am not judging no matter your response. I respect the internet version of you that I have met and think you seem like a very good guy. In fact, I have a high opinion of most of the "non-believers" on here.

[Topper]

Believing in no afterlife is not particularly comforting but makes this life more valuable.

It is also makes this life seem meaningless that relations are developed and then lost, lest one be one of the immortal few.

[SeattleUte]

Can we have a stipulation? UtahDan never intends to be rude, he never intends to have his posts taken the wrong way. I'm tired of having so many of his posts begin with that disclaimer. STIPULATED, as far as I'm concerned.

[creekster]

I think the change is profound. I think it makes you value this experience even more, makes you less willing to shrug your shoulders at injustice (God will make it right one day thinking), more willing to experience all kinds of things, more willing to change your mind when new evidence appears, more inclined to feel like you need to get this one shot right. That is how I see many (but certainly not all) people experiencing it. .

Don't take this the wrong way, but this is evidence of your ego more than a natural experience.

[creekster]

Can we have a stipulation? UtahDan never intends to be rude, he never intends to have his posts taken the wrong way. I'm tired of having so many of his posts begin with that disclaimer. STIPULATED, as far as I'm concerned.

Sorry. I NEVER stipulate to blanket objections. Besides, maybe his disclaimers assuage his guilty conscience, ever considere that?

[SeattleUte]

I think creekster has a point. I try not to do this but I'm going to disagree with my apostate brethren here. I don't think that generalizations can be made that joie de vie or fear of death is affected by being religious or an atheist. The simple reason for this might be that religious people themselves are not as sure of their faith as sometimes they make out to be. I think that youth is wasted on the young is probably closer to the truth. I also think that life is enhanced by education, and religion tends to be an enemy of that.

Martyrs are a whole different class of people altogether and beyond the scope of this post.