<div id="blog_author_info">
<div class="blog_author_name clearfix">
<div class="blog_author_date" style="width:auto">
<div class="float_left">
<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/g-elijah-dann"><img src="http://s.huffpost.com/contributors/g-elijah-dann/headshot.jpg" alt="G. Elijah Dann" height="45" width="45"></a><br>
</div>
<div class="float_left fixed_width_author" style="width:195px">
<h2><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/g-elijah-dann" rel="author">G. Elijah Dann</a></h2>
<p class="teaser_permalink">Instructor in philosophy and
religion at Simon Fraser University, and author of 'God and the Public
Square' and editor of 'Leaving Fundamentalism'</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="float_left margin_top_10">
<div class="float_left margin_bottom_10">
<span class="block align_left airal_11 bold color_222222 uppercase">GET UPDATES FROM G. Elijah Dann</span><br><br><font size="6"><b>Religion as a Private Pursuit, Science for Everyone
</b></font></div></div></div></div><br>A few years ago at the University of Toronto I taught the
course, The Philosophy of Sex. During the first class I remember telling
the students that, depending on their world-view, they'd end up
thinking very differently about the subject matter.
<p>The foundational Weltanschauung will strain the input, leading to fundamentally different, incommensurable output.</p>
<p>What I had in mind was how some of them would be filtering the course
material through their understanding of evolution, and others, in
Creationism, or, as they put it these days, Intelligent Design.
Certainly Bill Nye's recent remarks, "<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/bill-nye-creationism-science_n_1908926.html" target="_hplink">Creationism Threatens U.S. Science</a>," is another call to reflection. In my course, I used the example of homosexuality. </p>
<p>For those students who accept evolution, they'll believe that
homosexuality, heterosexuality and bisexuality are perfectly natural,
valid forms of sexuality. It's prevalent throughout nature and the
disposition is a matter of genetic and biological factors. On the other
hand, there are students who believe that God had a strong hand in
bringing the world into being, and gave the Bible as an instruction
manual to guide us. Homosexuality is therefore a choice. The same
contrast goes for the other topics of the course: Marriage, hetero and
homosexual. Sex before marriage. Masturbation. What is "sexual
deviance"? Prostitution. </p>
<p>Or, as Woody Allen remarked, "All my favorite hobbies."</p>
<p>As it turns out, with a strong view of religion -- especially with a
rejection of evolution -- you'll see most subjects very differently.
This is no surprise, but it's time to repeat once more that strong
religion is a detriment to our overall well-being. If you think religion
is mind-blowing (in the good sense), then you haven't been keeping up
in class. As Christopher Hitchens used to remark, if you think a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2uLKYBIRjc" target="_hplink">burning bush</a> is amazing, you should look at pictures from the <a href="http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/" target="_hplink">Hubble Space Telescope</a>. Congressman Georgia Rep. Paul Broun says that it's all from "<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/congressman-calls-evolution-lie-pit-hell-175514039.html" target="_hplink">the pit of hell,</a>" - evolution, modern astronomy and the such - which, if true, would mean that hell isn't half as bad as we might think.</p>
<p>With this said, religion, in some forms and for some people, is a
necessary and -- I dare say -- legitimate ingredient in their lives.
That is, as long as they keep it to themselves, as a private pursuit,
with the richness it can bring in ritual and as myth. </p>
<p>But strong religion -- the sort that turns the Bible into a
comprehensive textbook on science, history, philosophy, medicine,
sexuality, morality and politics -- is debilitating. Described by Joseph
Campbell, it's a "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Myths-Live-Joseph-Campbell/dp/0140194614" target="_hplink">little toy-room picture of the Bible</a>."</p>
<p>This "toy-room" picture is a powerful and popular way of interpreting
the world that still resonates with millions of people. The longer it
continues, however, the more it'll keep us from a serious encounter with
the real world. To mention a few, substantial encounters with that
reality, the past couple decades have granted truly phenomenal insights
into astronomy, quantum physics, biology, genetics and neurology. Today,
the insights and discoveries happen on a daily basis.</p>
<p>It's not that these respective advances in the sciences have shown
that God doesn't exist. It's rather that these, truly mind-blowing
discoveries, can be learned by everyone without losing oneself (viz.,
one's mind, family, friends, money or clothes -- as is often the case in
organized religion). Secondly, the more we learn about the real world,
the clearer it becomes that the Bible isn't a book about topics that
intrigue scientists. Clinging to a forced interpretation of the Bible
only strips it of its historical nature (as a record of archaic
societies) and coerces it to become transcendental <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-shermer/deepakese-the-woo-woo-mas_b_405114.html" target="_hplink">woo-woo</a> (if that isn't a pleonasm).</p>
<p>Religion, at least if you take its great writers seriously, like Joseph Campbell, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Mircea-Eliade/e/B000AP85TS" target="_hplink">Mircea Eliade</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Wilfred-Cantwell-Smith/e/B001HOD5XM" target="_hplink">Wifred Cantwell Smith</a>,
was the way primitive humanity understood its insignificant existence
in face of the awesome and often cruel powers of nature, man and
circumstances. Gazing out into the starlit sky, witnessing eclipses, the
oceans and its tides, cataclysms, seeing children suffer and die of
mysterious causes, explaining life was about myths, ritual and religion,
not a rigorous science that hadn't yet arrived. </p>
<p>To again quote Campbell, "myths are the mental supports of rites;
rites, the physical enactments of myths." For some of us even today,
they still our minds and emotions. In the midst of contemporary <a href="http://www.amazon.ca/Technopoly-The-Surrender-Culture-Technology/dp/0679745408" target="_hplink">technopoly</a>,
they are a legitimate and reasonable way of soothing ourselves in the
transitions and stages of life, just as other aesthetic choices. </p>
<p>But as an old professor of mine used to caution, "Just don't get
religious about it." If we think myth is actually an historical and
scientific happening, then it'll indeed make the New Atheists right.
Religion, as "getting religious," <a href="http://www.amazon.com/God-Is-Not-Great-Everything/dp/0446579807" target="_hplink">does poison everything</a>.</p>
Explaining the great mysteries of the universe is now the task of the
sciences. It's no longer about faith. It's about thinking. Don't forget
that if God exists, he/she/it should be thrilled these little brains
are starting to come out from behind the veil. St. Paul was more
insightful than he could've imagined:<br>
"<a href="http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm" target="_hplink">When
I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason
like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things</a>" (NASB)<br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<br><a href="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com" target="_blank">art.deco.studios@gmail.com</a><br>
<br><img src="http://users.moscow.com/waf/WP%20Fox%2001.jpg"><br><br>