Do We Need God?
I chose to look at chapter 12 of Question Everything. The essays examine whether we need God in society. The idea of God has many philosophical arguments and counterpoints so in this report it will be impossible to cover every nuance of such a heavy-loaded question. However, I will look at some pragmatic approaches underlined in these essays in their relation to God and religion. As a Christian myself I really did enjoy reading from a more secular lens.
Stephen T. Asma, Professor of Philosophy, begins his essay by recalling an anecdote of one of his students coming up to him after class. Asma had just finished lecturing on the incoherence of monotheism. The student shook a little and was quite nervous. He stuttered slowly and explained how his older teenage brother was brutally stabbed to death, attacked, and mutilated by a perpetrator who was never caught. His mother suffered a serious mental breakdown shortly after, yet something brought her out of being completely institutionalized. He claimed it was the church and the active participation she began to play in it brought her back to the normal mom she needed to be for her other children.
Religion is often used as a means for comfort and purpose in catastrophic circumstances like this mother faced. I personally am not overtly comforted by science when faced with grief, addiction, or death. Most people even many atheists can agree with that statement. However, the idea of comfort displayed by the student's mom is put off by neuroscientists as therapeutic power and social interaction which can improve psychological health. Scientists believe it is simply driven by macro-evolution within our brain functioning over millions of years. On the other hand, theists will say it is through the power of God that many people like the mother are healed and restored.
In this instance, atheists could argue we do not necessarily need God but what we do need is a well-established community of people, and shared comfort. Theists would state that is exactly why we do need God. The design argument in guided evolution would point to God fine-tuning each one of us to be made for a community with others and himself. This tuning would produce the psychological effects that neuroscientists research. The healing, comfort, community, and sense of purpose would naturally flow from being in a relationship with God. Regardless, macro-evolution with no guided process cannot explain why there is something rather than nothing. There is definitely a concept of faith in believing in either.
Many atheists and unbelievers still find it rational to insist on not needing God. I do not blame them entirely. God's name is often used in empty political rhetoric, unjustified holy wars, and also surrounded by cults seeking personal gain. This very well may relate to the plummeting belief in God especially in Western society. This is even with the fact that we have a naturally occurring intuitive idea of God and we must override this sentiment with effort.
Whether you believe we need God or not, I am certain most of us can agree that we are in desperate need of SOMETHING. The mother serves as an interesting example to those who wrestle with the idea of if we need God. You may claim there are other ways to console and reason with death or life, but with no mistake, the mother found an abundance of life despite the circumstances. God gives and satisfies questions Philosophers will continue to think about for the end of time. Some do yearn for a more pragmatic approach to life which explains why God continues to be needed by many for purpose, love, and contentment.
Discussion Questions :
1. What do you believe we need to change the trajectory of society?
2. Do you think Marx is accurate when he describes religion as the " Opium of the Masses"?
3. What is the strongest argument for God? Against God?
"I personally am not overtly comforted by science when faced with grief, addiction, or death. Most people even many atheists can agree with that statement." ALL should agree that SOME are not comforted or consoled by a scientific, secular, naturalistic, humanistic (etc.) worldview, but all should also concede that many are. There's a long tradition of philosophically-grounded consolation, going back to Boethius, Socrates, ancient Buddhism and beyond (and more recently represented by John Dewey's "A Common Faith" and Bertrand Russell's "A Free Man's Worship"... Ultimately though, WJ was right to observe the plurality and varieties of human experience, and to call for "hands off" others' ways' of coping with the challenges of living and dying.
ReplyDeleteThe Design/Fine Tuning argument has been pretty soundly refuted, I think...
I like the good cop/bad cop routine with Russell (I think) and Peirce. No wonder Socrates was bewildered.
3. I don't think "argument" is generally the way most people resolve their religiosity or lack thereof, it's more about experience, temperament, tradition, ...
DeleteBut if anyone's interested, Rebecca Goldstein's "36 Arguments: A Work of Fiction" has a nice appendix that summarizes a bunch of arguments for the existence of God. https://www.randomhouse.com/pantheon/authors/goldstein/36%20Arguments.pdf