• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Stephen Jay Gould’s Non-Overlapping Magisteria

 
 
 
DrZoidberg

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
12,269
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I'm starting to warm up to Stephen Jay Gould’s Non-Overlapping Magisteria, assuming we make some adjustments.

According to Gould, religion was about meaning, morals and values (and science deals with facts about the natural world).

I don't like this as is, because science has plenty to say about morals, meanings and values.

But if we instead adjust it to, religion is about feelings. Then I think it works. Religion as an emotional manageament tool. Which I think is a superior tool to science. There's only so much emotional support pills can give. Yes, I am aware that the secular world also creates platforms for emotional support. But it just doesn't have the pull as religion. Me and my girlfriend signed up as volonteers for a Christmas party for poor people struggling. When we were trying to find organisations to join, they were all Christian. I live in Denmark. Danes are very atheist. The celebration of Christmas stopped being Christian a long time ago in these parts.

Religions just seem to be much better at creating emotionally meaningful, nurturing and connecting moments than science. I share a house with scientists who do "street astronomy". Ie, taking a telescope out on the Copenhagen streets and letting people look through it. Which is cool, and creates a sense of community. But the moment people leave, that's the end of it. Religion gives emotional glue in the way other things just don't do.

Or to put it another way, why does science and secularism suck so much at bringing people together?
 
Feelings are not the domain of religion, they are the domain of endocrinology.

Endocrinology just happens to be so unbelievably complex that we haven't begun to grasp more than the most basic basics.

The sole domain of religion is taking the unknown, and making up bullshit to fill the gap, so we don't have to admit to ignorance.

Anything that is (or becomes) known, immediately moves from the religious domain to the scientific; There is exactly no reason to believe that anything is eternally unknowable, so there is exactly nothing that can be identified as belonging permanently to religion.

As far as a sense of community or belonging goes, that's just as readily available through tribalisms other than religious tribalism; For example through sports fandom, or patriotism, or loyalty to an aristocratic hierarchy.
 
bilby said:
Feelings are not the domain of religion, they are the domain of endocrinology.

Endocrinology just happens to be so unbelievably complex that we haven't begun to grasp more than the most basic basics.
Click to expand...

I don't buy that. I remember in therapy and my therapist telling me that avoidant people, instead of working through their emotions, analyse their emotions, put a label on it and then think they're worked through it. But all they've done is avoiding feeling the feeling. This is what I did for years. I'm better now.

How isn't slapping the label "endocrinology" just another version of that?

Or what Jungians, trauma therapists and IFS therapists call "integration". Ie, thoughts a bodily reactions integrated.

Having a preacher call lines from the Bible and there's a call and response from the crowd, is exactly this... integration. Arguably, brainwashing. But religions actively do this. Which humans need. I don't know any secular activity that also does this. Watching bands play? They don't consiously do it anyway. In the secular world, isn't it seen as bad form?


bilby said:
The sole domain of religion is taking the unknown, and making up bullshit to fill the gap, so we don't have to admit to ignorance.
Click to expand...



bilby said:
Anything that is (or becomes) known, immediately moves from the religious domain to the scientific; There is exactly no reason to believe that anything is eternally unknowable, so there is exactly nothing that can be identified as belonging permanently to religion.
Click to expand...

Sure. But outside your bedroom door when you close it is also the unknown. You consiously fill it with the notion that there's not a monster there. But if your emotions get worked up about the monster outside the door, there's no mere thinking in the world that can fix that.

Or the unknown of what is going on in the heads of that group of people standing around you brandishing knives.

So sure... religion deals with the unknown. But the unknown is more mundane than "the big questions". It's just everything not in front of our face this very moment. I'd say that's the unknown religion primarily deals with. And that's harder for secularists to wave away.

What religion does to help us manage emotions isn't merely the information that God loves us. It's that in conjunction with bodily rituals and repetative activities. All stuff science says works for emotional management. But it seems like only religions can actually successfully make us do all the things that are good for us.

bilby said:
As far as a sense of community or belonging goes, that's just as readily available through tribalisms other than religious tribalism; For example through sports fandom, or patriotism, or loyalty to an aristocratic hierarchy.
Click to expand...

I'll give you sports. But otherwise secularists fucking suck at this. All patriotism has been mediated by religion. fandom... meh. A bunch of nerds not communicating in groups is also not emotional connection. It's a simulation of emotional connection. Religion just does this so much better.
 
DrZoidberg said:
Having a preacher call lines from the Bible and there's a call and response from the crowd, is exactly this... integration. Arguably, brainwashing. But religions actively do this. Which humans need. I don't know any secular activity that also does this.
Click to expand...
Have you ever been to a football match?
 
bilby said:
DrZoidberg said:
Having a preacher call lines from the Bible and there's a call and response from the crowd, is exactly this... integration. Arguably, brainwashing. But religions actively do this. Which humans need. I don't know any secular activity that also does this.
Click to expand...
Have you ever been to a football match?
Click to expand...

This is why I think football should be classed as a religion. My personal take on religion is that its npt something you believe in. Its something you do.

The problem with defining religion as a belief, is that it only fits two religions that have ever existed, Christianity and Islam. The rest are activities, in groups or alone.

Seen that way, football is absolutely a religion
 
DrZoidberg said:
I think its self evident
Click to expand...
That is usually an indicator of a subject you haven't studied sufficiently well.

Whenever I think something is self evident, I try* to treat that thought as a red flag - it usually indicates that I need to go away and learn about that thing before I make a fool of myself.







* But usually fail; It's a lot easier to spot other peoples' flaws than it is to spot my own
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom