Criticism of religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article or section does not adequately cite its references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. (help, get involved!)
Any material not supported by sources may be challenged and removed at any time. This article has been tagged since November 2006.

The criticism of religion includes criticism of the concept of religion, the validity of religion itself, the practice of religion, and the consequences of religion on humanity. The singular word religion is not meant to represent a particular religion or any group of religions.

Most western criticism of religion focuses on the Abrahamic religions, particularly Christianity. Not all the criticism would apply to all religions: criticism regarding the existence of God, for example, has very little relevance to Buddhism.

Contents

[edit] Criticism of the concept

“ Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable. ”

—H. L. Mencken

At the core of almost all religions are articles of faith that are irrational, improbable, require a leap of faith and steadfast convictions. Critics do not accept these articles of faith as truth (citing lack of supporting evidence) and instead see them as social constructs. Critics often maintain that these social constructs once served useful functions in human society but are now outdated having been superseded by natural sciences, laws and humanist ethics.

[edit] Irrational foundation

See also: faith

Many skeptics consider that all religious faith is essentially irrational,[1][2] and incompatible with reason.[3] Friedrich Nietzsche defined faith as "not wanting to know what is true."[4]

It will not do to investigate the subject of religion too closely, as it is apt to lead to infidelity. (Abraham Lincoln)[5]
The way to see by Faith is to shut the eye of reason. (Benjamin Franklin)[6]
When you know a man's religious complexion, you know what sort of books he reads when he wants some more light, and what sort of books he avoids, lest by accident he get more light than he wants. (Mark Twain)[7]
Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded prospect. (James Madison)[8]

The trouble with Faith is that it cannot coexist with Reason. Either when the religious beliefs run into a conflict with the senses, or with the world of science, we must somehow accept incompatible ideas or we must choose. The number of intelligent people who attend church services regularly suggests that many people can live in a sort of schizophrenic reality, where the laws of nature operate at all times except when thinking religious thoughts. On the other hand, they pretend to believe both but really only believe one. However, some of us cannot do that, and we are asked to abdicate our intellects as to preserve the purity of the dogma. Arthur Schopenhauer, Religion: A Dialogue[9]

Schopenhauer also criticizes believers for mistakenly trusting those who claim religious authority, rather than thinking for themselves.

Alvin Plantinga defines a theist as "one who believes in God as basic albeit not on logical grounds". In Is belief in God Rational, he argues that religious believers do not believe doctrines in the way that scientists (at least in principle) believe theories—they do not have a readiness to reconsider their belief:

The mature believer, the mature theist, does not typically accept belief in God tentatively, or hypothetically, or until something better comes along. Nor, I think, does he accept it as a conclusion from other things he believes; he accepts it as basic, as a part of the foundations of his noetic structure. The mature theist commits himself to belief in God: this means that he accepts belief in God as basic.[10]

Committed belief is sometimes called "faith based on zeal". Most philosophers consider that the subordination of reason to emotional commitment is detrimental, as in Plato's Crito, where Socrates states to the naive Crito, "Your zeal is invaluable, if a right one; but if wrong, the greater the zeal the greater the evil." A similar sentiment is expressed by Bertrand Russell, who regards belief in the absence of evidence as harmful.

Christians hold that their faith does well, but other faiths do harm. At any rate, they hold this about the Communist faith. What I wish to maintain is that all faiths do harm. We may define ‘faith’ as a firm belief in something for which there is no evidence. When there is evidence, no one speaks of ‘faith’. We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence.[11]

[edit] Implausibility of specific beliefs

While much criticism of religion is directed towards a specific creed, there are many fundamental similarities between the different religions. Most religions teach that there exists a God, who has incarnated, manifested or inspired a prophet to teach humanity about spiritual truths. These are usually recorded in the religion's Holy Scripture. A serious argument against religion is that these common and central features face severe criticism in almost all religions.

[edit] Christian Examples

An example of an implausible belief is the traditional Christian doctrine of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, along with his bodily ascension into heaven. The Oxford English Dictionary defines death in part as: “the final cessation of the vital functions.” Once a human body dies, a series of changes take place at a rapid rate. The heart stops beating followed by a cascade of cellular death beginning with brain cells and finishing with the skin cells.[12] Unlike in ancient times, the stages of decomposition are now well understood. Within three days of death, a significant amount of changes have occurred.[13] The process has already gone far beyond any plausible possibility of the body coming back to life. There is also the implausible belief of Christ’s bodily ascending, in full view of the apostles, into heaven. This story could be rephrased as, his adult body floated up into the sky, through the clouds, through the Troposphere, the Stratosphere and Ozone Layer, the Mesosphere and finally the Ionosphere ending in the vacuum of space.[14] Once there, his body would be subjected to -273 degrees celsius temperatures and the Solar wind. Our solar system is part of the Milky Way Galaxy. This galaxy is only one of innumerable other galaxies thus far discovered by the Hubble Space Telescope and many other observations. There is no indication in this collection of data of anything traditionally understood as heaven existing ‘above’ us for Christ to bodily ascend to. As Craig Duckett wrote in his essay written shortly after the 9/11 attacks, ‘Belief, Truth, Assumption and Reason,’[15] “Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.”

[edit] Plurality of Religious message

While there are some general similarities, there are also significant differences between religions. The plurality of religion illustrates many seemingly mutually exclusive claims, such as who may be designated the Chosen people. Stephen F. Roberts, a widely quoted atheist on the Internet, said, "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."[16] The oldest of the World Religions began in distinctive regional and cultural contexts. An example of this is the contrasting history of Hinduism and Judaism. See History of Hinduism and History of Ancient Israel and Judah. Both traditions served to unite and give a sense of community identity to their populations. Both have rich histories and are themselves parents of later religions. In the case of Hinduism, it forms the foundation for Jainism and Buddhism. A defining characteristic of Hinduism is concept of reincarnation. This concept also plays an important role in these other two religions, whereas this theme is completely absent from traditional classical sources of Judaism such as the Tanakh ("Hebrew Bible"), the classical rabbinic works (Midrash, Mishnah and Talmud), the writings of the Geonim, most of the Rishonim, or Maimonides' 13 Principles of Faith. See article Bible and reincarnation. Judaism forms the foundation for Christianity, Islam and the Bahá'í Faith. These three traditions are characterised as Abrahamic religion. There are many themes begun in Judaism that continue through these two subsequent traditions, in particular they are defined by a strong emphasis on strict monotheism. Hinduism and Judaism developed in complete independence of each other. Geographical and cultural boundaries separating the Mediterranean cultures from the Indian subcontinent precluded any significant contact prior to the arrival of Alexander the Great, by which time the thematic outlines of both traditions were largely solidified. As can be seen in the above articles, Hinduism and Judaism reflect the history and experience of very different populations and circumstances. Given their different starting points and distinctive contexts, it is not surprising the contents of their scriptures contain very different messages.

[edit] Social construct

See also: Development of religion

One criticism of religion is the proposition that religion is a social construct and thus is just another human ideology. Under this view, the origins of religion lie in human beings and human societies, not in the intervention of some divine being or cosmic truth. Accordingly, the historicity of religious accounts is called into question.

[edit] Opium of the people

“ Religious suffering is, at the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. ”

—Karl Marx

The philosopher Karl Marx believed religion to be a social construct, and furthermore, that religion is harmful to humanity because it dissuades the oppressed masses from actively pursuing a solution to their earthly problems as religion promises that the faithful shall receive a heavenly reward in their afterlife. Marx also believed that the desire for religious belief is in response to alienation or inadequacy in material life, and cannot be eliminated until human material life is emancipated, at which point desire for religion will naturally wither away. He hoped to achieve this through Communism.

Religion (according to Marx) is a tool utilized by the ruling classes whereby the masses can shortly relieve their suffering via the act of experiencing religious emotions. It is in the interest of the ruling classes to instill in the masses the religious conviction that their current suffering will lead to eventual happiness. Therefore as long as the public believes in religion, they will not attempt to make any genuine effort to understand and overcome the real source of their suffering, which in Marx's opinion was their non-Communist economic system.

Religion is the opium of the people because:

  • it provides momentary relief from pain but it could not eliminate the source of the pain.
  • it induces fantasies of a better life in heaven.

In this perspective, Marx saw religion as escapism.

“ The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo. ”

Marxists also view the Christian doctrine of original sin as being deeply anti-social in character. Original sin, they argue, convinces people that the source of their misery lays in the inherent and unchangeable "sinfulness" of humanity rather than in the forms of social organization and institutions, which, Marxists argue, can be changed through the application of collective social planning.

[edit] Computer viruses/memes

Richard Dawkins coined the term memes in his book "The Selfish Gene" to describe informational units that can be transmitted culturally, analogous to genes. He later used this concept in the essay Viruses of the Mind to explain the persistence of religious ideas in human culture. Religion can, by analogy to computer viruses , be considered viruses of the human mind. Richard Dawkins argues that religious ideologies are a set of ideas and concepts working together to ensure the perpetuation and proliferation of the religion itself. For instance, important concepts in Christianity are raising your children to be Christians, following The Great Commission and its Monotheistic nature. These are proposed to work together to protect the religion from competition from other memes. In this context, religion is criticized for being maladaptive in that it can cause the carrier of that meme to act irrationally, misallocate resources and feel guilt, fear or other negative emotions without real reason.

[edit] Superseded by science, philosophy, and the arts

The function of religion can be successfully replaced by other branches of human activity. Our explanatory need is satisfied by science, philosophy and ethics are concerned with questions of meaning and the quest for the good life, while inspiration and beauty can be found in the arts.[17] Several prominent scientists and religious critics have begun making optimistic predictions as to the gradual replacement of dogmatic faith with rational ethics. Daniel Dennett, author of Breaking the Spell, said “I expect to live to see the evaporation of the powerful mystique of religion. I think that in about twenty-five years almost all religions will have evolved into very different phenomena, so much so that in most quarters religion will no longer command the awe it does today. [18] Geoffrey Miller,[19], in November 2006 edition of New Scientist said: “Evolutionary moral psychology will reveal the social conditions under which human moral virtues flourish. The US will follow the UK in realising that religion is not a prerequisite for ordinary human decency. Thus, science will kill religion - not by reason challenging faith, but by offering a more practical, universal and rewarding moral framework for human interaction. A naturalistic moral philosophy will replace the rotting fictions of theological ethics.”[20] Dr. John Bradshaw, Professor of Neuropsychology Monash University Melbourne wrote: “Evolutional models are every bit as beautiful and intellectually and morally satisfying as the myths, stories and precepts of an ossified theology - and they can explain, predict and be applied in hosts of important and socially useful ways.”[21]

As scientific knowledge increases over time, religious explanations for most natural events are no longer required by the masses hence the domain of religious explanation now consists mainly of events that can be only be justified by supernatural phenomena, see God of the Gaps.

Dead religions are now referred to as (ancient) myths/mythologies, see Religion and mythology. Examples include Egyptian, Sumerian, Babylonian and Assyrian Gods and Goddesses, the Aztec religion dependent on human sacrifice, Greek and Roman Panthesim and Persian Mithraism. Ancient Mythology primarily focuses on stories that a particular culture has believed to be true and which may use supernatural events or characters to explain the nature of the universe and humanity. They also involve various ritual practices no longer seen to have any value, such as augury and the interpretation of omens. These were fully supported by their belief systems, and were once seen as vitally important skills. See Haruspex, the interpretation of divine will by inspecting the entrails of a sacrificial animal.[22] A short work by the ancient author Lucian of Samosata, titled “The Syrian Goddess”[23] provides many examples of once thriving religions that no longer exist.

[edit] Harmful to the practitioner

[edit] Irrational and unfalsifiable belief

Religion often promotes beliefs that are considered by its critics to be irrational superstitions, and religion frequently defends itself by opposing or suppressing rational and inquiring thought.[24] Often this is done by passing laws against blasphemy and by demanding that religious beliefs are shown greater respect than other beliefs.[25]

In addition, many religions actively discourage lateral thinking or 'doubting'. Many religious individuals believe that 'life is a test', where they are constantly under siege from an evil supernatural entity ( the devil ) who is constantly trying to lure them away from their god into eternal torment. This view of the world makes people very wary of ideas and experiences outside of their religion and actively or passively can cause them to lead a very narrow existence.

Some notable recent philosophers of religion, such as Alvin Plantinga, have argued that religious belief founded on irrational reasons such as religious experiences are justified, even if the believer can't prove his conviction by rational arguments. The idea that rational reasoning is not relevant to religious beliefs is known as Fideism.

[edit] Dogmatism

Religion typically involves the exercise of religious authority over the beliefs and actions of the individual. Religious authorities tend to be dogmatic, for a number of reasons:

  • because they must maintain the plausibility of the claim that their knowledge is timeless
  • because they generally believe that the most reliable source of knowledge was given in the past
  • because systems of preferment tend to reward dogmatism
  • because free thinking is feared as something that will undermine belief

[edit] Arbitrary restrictions

From an outsider's point of view, many religions impose seemingly arbitrary restrictions on followers, regarding what they must or must not say, eat, drink (e.g. Kosher); whom they may marry, what they must (or must not) wear in public, with whom they may associate (particularly gender separation[26]) and so forth. Involvement in rituals, fasting, and pilgrimages is often required or encouraged (e.g. the Hajj). Such unnecessary restrictions do not seem to advance any ethical ends, and undermine the dignity and freedom of a free human being.

[edit] Ideological indoctrination of children

Richard Dawkins equates the religious indoctrination of children by parents and teachers in faith schools to a form of mental abuse on children.[27] Dawkins gets angry with the term “Muslim child” or a “Catholic child”. He asks how a young child can possibly be considered intellectually mature enough to have such independent views on the cosmos and humanity’s place within it. By contrast, Dawkins points out, no reasonable person would speak of a "Marxist child" or a "Tory child".

[edit] Religion and Mental Illness

See also: Psychology of religion

Christian apologist C. S. Lewis demands a firm decision about Jesus's divine status, he writes, "either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse."[28] While there are many responses to Lewis's trilemma, one option is to accept that a person believing they have been chosen by a divine being for a special mission may suffer from a mental disorder. Some religiously-inspired figures, such as Joan of Arc, said they were guided by voices. Today we know auditory hallucinations are a common feature of those suffering from schizophrenia. Someone exhibiting signs of what was once interpreted as ‘demonic possession’ are likely to be approached by health professionals as someone suffering from hysteria, mania, psychosis, or dissociative identity disorder. American author Sam Harris, has written on the subjects of neuroscience and reason, authored a book titled The End of Faith following the 9/11 terrorist attacks and later Letter to a Christian Nation. In End of Faith, he compares religion to mental illness saying it, "allows otherwise normal human beings to reap the fruits of madness and consider them holy."[29]

There is growing evidence temporal lobe epilepsy is the most significant source of both religious visions and other highly unusual experiences, such as the notion of alien abduction phenomenon. Carl Sagan, in his last book, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, presented his case for the miraculous sightings of religious figures in the past and the modern sightings of UFOs coming from the same mental disorder. In his work “Transcendent Experience and Temporal Lobe Epilepsy”[30] Clifford A. Pickover explores the growing evidence temporal lobe epilepsy is linked to a variety of spiritual and/or ‘other worldly’ experiences, such as spiritual possession, originating from altered electrical activity in the brain. According to Professor Vilayanur S. Ramachandran, “It's possible that many great religious leaders had temporal lobe seizures and this predisposes them to having visions, having mystical experiences.”[31] Dr. Michael Persinger stimulated the temporal lobes of the brain artificially with a magnetic field using a device nicknamed the “God helmet,” and was able to artificially induce religious experiences along with near-death experiences and ghost sightings. Neuropsychology Professor John Bradshaw says, “Some forms of temporal lobe tumours or epilepsy are associated with extreme religiosity. Recent brain imaging of devotees engaging in prayer or transcendental meditation has more precisely identified activation in such sites - God-spots, as Vilayanur Ramachandran calls them. Psilocybin from magic mushrooms contacts the serotonergic system, with terminals in these and other brain regions, generating a sense of cosmic unity, transcendental meaning and religious ecstasy. Certain physical rituals can generate both these feelings and corresponding serotonergic activity.”[32]

While religious ‘inspiration’ may be caused by a variety of mental illnesses, there is also the issue of how religion has addressed what it does define as mental illness. Faith Healing, and in its most extreme form, Exorcism have both been practiced by many traditions throughout history. In both cases, symptoms that would today be diagnosed by a doctor, psychiatrist or other medical professional in one way are interpreted as signs of spiritual malase by the faith healer or exorcist. The cause and cure are defined using criteria set out by the faith tradition of the healer. As with all other aspects of differing traditions, these criteria will vary according to the healers' religion.[33][34] These belief-based healings have come into direct conflict with both the medical profession and the law when victims of these practices are harmed, or in the most extreme cases, killed by these ‘cures.’[35][36][37]

There are certain places with deep associations with religious feeling. One of these is Jerusalem, revered by followers of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. One little known side effect of this is Jerusalem has a unique situation of individuals coming to that city because they believe themselves to be the returning Jesus Christ or another prophet. This phenomenon is known generally as “The Jerusalem syndrome.”[38][39]

[edit] Harmful to society

[edit] Religious wars

Main article: Religious war
“ Those who can make you believe in absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ”

—Voltaire

One of the worst results of religious beliefs in the world seems to be the phenomenon of religious wars. Some argue that these are mostly caused by misinterpretations of the relevant religions' ethical rules. However, the tendency for religious war can also be attributed to the frequency and extent to which heretics and infidels are considered evil, and to the power of religion to reinforce tribal identity and encourage ignorance of outsiders. These conflicts are among the most difficult to resolve, particularly where both sides believe that God is on their side and has endorsed the moral righteousness of their claims. Furthermore, where God is credited with creating morality, he can be considered to have the power to allow or demand exceptions. This may result in holy warriors committing atrocities in the name of their deity. Finally, a focus on their "next life" may encourage soldiers to take a willing part in war, and to risk their present lives with greater abandon.

Terrorist atrocities such as 9/11 and the 2005 London bombings are sometimes carried out by those with very strong religious convictions. These acts of religious terrorism are seen by the terrorists as small skirmishes in the context of a much larger global religious war. For example, Mohamed Atta, the leader of the 9/11 attack, was an Islamic fundamentalist. Although the causes of terrorism are extremely complex and difficult to understand, it may be that terrorists are partially reassured by their religious views that God is on their side and will reward them in heaven for punishing unbelievers.

[edit] Impedes human progress

Another criticism is that religion restricts thought. When religion purports to offer a complete answer to problems of purpose, morality, origins or science, it inevitably discourages exploration of those areas (by suppressing curiosity), and thereby denies its followers a broader perspective, and prevents progress. Examples include the Church's attack on Galileo for suggesting that the Earth revolves around the Sun, the opposition from the Church to Darwin's theory of evolution, and present-day opposition to potentially life-saving research into stem cells.

[edit] Eschatologically irresponsible

Another criticism of religion is that it has a tendency to focus on the end of the world, the spirit, or the next life, and consequently causes this world to be neglected. Critics claim this creates an indifference to injustice, treatment (and prevention) of diseases, environmental destruction, and other remediable ills. The religiously based opposition to the recently developed HPV vaccine is an example of such irresponsibility toward the treatment of human diseases.

[edit] Metaphysical absolutism

Every religion considers its teachings or revelations to be those that are the closest to the universal truths and those of other religions to be further away (than itself) from the truths, and often in direct contradiction to them.

Liberal traditions tend to regard all faiths as valuable, and even valid in some undefined sense, but maintaining the superiority of their own. Fundamentalist traditions tend to identify other faiths with whatever manifestation of evil is recognized in their own, e.g. fundamentalist Christians sometimes see other religions as the products of Satan.

Critics of this worldview claim that this monopoly of universal truths leads, inevitably, to a very ingrained 'us vs. them' group solidarity and mentality which, to a wide range of extents, dehumanize or demonize individuals outside the particular faith as 'not fully human', or in some way less worthy and less deserving of rights and regard. Results can, based on the fanaticism of this belief, vary from mild discrimination to outright genocide.

[edit] Moral deficiency

Critics say dogmatic religions are typically morally deficient, elevating to moral status lots of ancient and ill-informed rules that may have been designed for reasons of hygiene, politics, or other reasons in a bygone era.[40] People who break these rules are often condemned and victimized even though they have done no harm to anyone.

Religious institutions typically declare they have special knowledge of absolute morality, and invoke this to hinder debates on many issues such as stem cell research and voluntary euthanasia. By taking a deontological view of morality, they refuse to consider the consequences of their hard line positions and thereby cause more suffering than necessary.

Many recognized evils, such as domestic violence, sexism, animal sacrifice, disease (unhygienic behavior), and slavery have enjoyed much support from religious leaders in the past, because they were supported by doctrine. Thus, some say that, by induction, this phenomenon must still be occurring today. Some critics draw parallels between how the "wrong" stances on both the socials issues of today and these old issues are/were supported by religion, yet today the old stances are abhorred by most while immoral religious positions on current issues are accepted. An example of this is how some homosexuals claim discrimination against them is similar to that blacks experienced before the civil rights movement.

All theistic religion devalues human compassion and morality. For a principled atheist/humanist these are the foremost concern. For a religious person, obedience to a deity/scripture is morality and personal conscience has to take second place. The most widely known example of this is the order to murder Isaac. The Bible contains many injunctions against following one's conscience over scripture. In addition, positive actions are supposed to originate not from compassion, but from the fear of punishment. Divine command theory is the metaethical theory that moral behaviors are only those that conform to the instructions given or commanded by the god or gods.

Critics also contend that faith-based moral constructs create false causal relationships between acts, which works to dull a true sense of morality. For example, the Christian system of "sinning" allows for sins to be washed away or diminished by confession and praying. Hinduism/Buddhism's "Karma" allows acts to tie into each other, where no logical causual relationship exists. This manifests itself as Christians having a dulled sense of the morality of their acts. If a morally egregious act is committed, forgiveness can be asked or righteous acts can be committed to make up for the moral deficiency. In Karma, one bad act can be balanced with a good one. Critics of religious morality contend that while these systems may have good intentions, the morality created is false, dulled, and inefficient, even self-delusional. Self-delusion is witnessed by seeing people who kill others in the name of their religion, yet claim they have acted just and morally. To contrast, a humanistic system of morality sees an immoral act as remaining immoral; If you physically hurt someone, no amount of praying, good deeds, or confessing will diminish the immorality of the act committed. This reason-based morality works to keep the true impact of immoral or moral acts as absolute, instead of relative.

[edit] Racism

See also: Religious attitudes to racism

Despite many religions forbidding racial and other forms of discrimination, religion has been used by some as justification for advocating racism. The Ku Klux Klan, Christian Identity movement and many Post-Medieval Theologians made claims that white people are closer to God than other races. Islam and Judaism have been criticized for being inherently racist due to their views that Arabs and Jews respectively are seen as the chosen people by God according to their sacred texts. Religious terrorist organizations such as the forenamed Ku Klux Klan, Kach and others also hold racist views.

[edit] Homophobia

See also: Homosexuality and religion

Most major religions consider homosexuality to be immoral. Such influence has lead to a rise in homophobia, particularly in the United States. Singer Sir Elton John said religion promotes the hatred of homosexuals (among other things). He said, "I think religion has always tried to turn hatred towards gay people... Organized religion does not seem to work. It turns people into really hateful lemmings and it's not really compassionate."[41]

[edit] Monopoly on virtue

Another criticism of religion is that it (unwittingly) promotes the idea that virtuous behavior only comes from obeying religious regulations. This gave many religious believers the idea that their religion (religious system) has a monopoly on virtue. This has the unfortunate effect of implying that people who do not follow the proper religious regulations are therefore (by logical deduction) behaving immorally.

An example of this would be the idea that women who "do not cover themselves up modestly" have tendencies for immorality and therefore do not have a good character.

[edit] Political opposition

Some people object to religion on principle because they view the authoritarian nature of most religions to be an affront to the ideals of democracy and equality. They are offended by the dogma of the rules and doctrine of an entirely synthetic (as they see it) and non-democratic institution such as the Christian church.

[edit] Authoritarian

The term "authoritarian" is used to describe an organization, an institution or a state that enforces strong and sometimes oppressive measures against those within its sphere of influence, generally without any attempts at gaining their consent and often not allowing negative feedback on its policies.

The degree in which a religion is authoritarian can be estimated by

  • How much influence the religion's laws have on the laws of the land.
  • How heretics are treated.
  • How apostates are treated.
  • How unbelievers are treated.

Religions tend to increase their influence over the community by first seeking the patronage of the ruling elite. Once such patronage has been secured, a religion may seek to influence the politics of the land, with the ultimate goal of having the religious laws passed as the law of the land.

In this sense, religion can be seen as authoritarian, insofar as its goal is to define itself as "the ultimate authority by which the law of the land is granted." As this divine source of authority is not to be criticized by non-religious arguments, it is the antithesis to secularism. A country where the above has been achieved is called a theocracy.

[edit] References

  1. ^ Bryan Caplan. Why Religious Beliefs Are Irrational, and Why Economists Should Care. The article about religion and irrationality.
  2. ^ http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Irrational_Faith.html Importance of Philosophy
  3. ^ http://www.talkreason.org/articles/magisteria.cfm Talk Reason: Incompatible Magisteria
  4. ^ The Anti-Christ, Friedrich Nietzsche.
  5. ^ What Great Men Think Of Religion, Ira Cundriff.
  6. ^ Poor Richard 1758, Benjamin Franklin.
  7. ^ What Great Men Think Of Religion, Ira Cundriff.
  8. ^ A letter to William Bradford: 1774, James Madison.
  9. ^ Religion: A Dialogue, Arthur Schopenhauer
  10. ^ Is Belief in God Rational in Rationality and Religious Belief, ed. C.F. Delaney, Notre Dame University Press, 1979, p.27)
  11. ^ Bertrand Russell, Human Society in Ethics and Politics
  12. ^ http://www.deathonline.net/decomposition/body_changes/index.htm Decomposition: What happens to the body after death
  13. ^ http://www.deathonline.net/decomposition/decomposition/initial_decay.htm Decomposition: Initial decay - zero to three days after death
  14. ^ http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970603.html
  15. ^ http://www.control-z.com/pgs/pers_state1.html Belief, Truth, Assumption, and Reason
  16. ^ Dianna Narciso. Like Rolling Uphill: Realizing the Honesty of Atheism, p. 6. ISBN 1932560742. 
  17. ^ http://www.evolutionary-metaphysics.net/replacing_religion.html Academy of Evolutionary Metaphysics, Replacing Religion with Science
  18. ^ http://edge.org/q2007/q07_1.html#dennett The Evaporation of the Powerful Mystique of Religion
  19. ^ http://www.unm.edu/~psych/faculty/sm_gmiller.html Geoffrey Miller website
  20. ^ http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19225780.108-geoffrey-miller-forecasts-the-future.html New Scientist
  21. ^ http://www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2006/1664571.htm Ockham’s Razor, June 18, 2006, A God of the Gaps? Dr John Bradshaw, Professor of Neuropsychology Monash University Melbourne
  22. ^ http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mclennan/BA/Har.html The Art of Haruspicy
  23. ^ http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/luc/tsg/index.htm The Syrian Goddess
  24. ^ C. Dennis McKinsey. Solidification and Isolation: How Biblical Faith Protects Itself From Critics. The second article on that page.
  25. ^ See the Douglas Adams quote in beginning of the God Delusion (and the wikipedia article about it).
  26. ^ Raid Qusti. Women Asked to Leave Seminar.
  27. ^ Richard Dawkins. "Childhood, abuse and the escape from religion", The God Delusion. 
  28. ^ C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, p. 43.
  29. ^ The End of Faith - http://www.samharris.org/site/book_end_of_faith
  30. ^ Pickover, Clifford. "The Vision of the Chariot: Transcendent Experience and Temporal Lobe Epilepsy". Science & Spirit, September/October 1999.
  31. ^ BBC Science & Nature - God on the Brain http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbraintrans.shtml
  32. ^ http://www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2006/1664571.htm Ockham’s Razor, June 18, 2006, A God of the Gaps? Dr John Bradshaw, Professor of Neuropsychology Monash University Melbourne
  33. ^ Exorcism by Rabbis: Talmud Sages and Their Magic, Bar-Ilan University, Israel http://faculty.biu.ac.il/~barilm/exorcism.html
  34. ^ Exorcism in the Orthodox Church http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7079.asp
  35. ^ Exorcism priest is jailed for nun death http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=271822007
  36. ^ US boy dies during 'exorcism' http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3179789.stm
  37. ^ Exorcism bid turns fatal, The Hindu http://www.hindu.com/2005/01/05/stories/2005010512820300.htm
  38. ^ Jerusalem Syndrome: Jewish Virtual Library http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/jersynd.html
  39. ^ Jerusalem Syndrome http://savvytraveler.publicradio.org/show/features/2000/20000603/jerusalem.shtml
  40. ^ Nobel Peace Laureate, Muslim and human rights activist Dr Shirin Ebadi has spoken out against undemocratic Islamic countries justifying "oppressive acts" in the name of Islam. Speaking at the Earth Dialogues 2006 conference in Brisbane, Dr Ebadi said her native Iran as well as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Yemen "among others" were guilty of human rights violations. "In these countries, Islamic rulers want to solve 21st century issues with laws belonging to 14 centuries ago," she said. "Their views of human rights are exactly the same as it was 1400 years ago."
  41. ^ "When Elton met Jake", The Observer.

[edit] See also

[edit] Criticism of specific religions

[edit] Criticism of non-religious positions

[edit] External links

  • [1] Is it possible to be a Buddhist and not believe in Reincarnation?
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/r/i/Criticism_of_religion.html"
In other languages