The Science of Religion

It has been some time since I have written a post. It has been some time since I have had any thoughts worth writing. But last night I was privy to an interesting discussion. In my wanderings about Provo, I came across a book club discussion. They were discussing a book written by a prominent atheist whose name I didn't quite catch. The discussion wandered around for a little, touching on various ideas from the text, until finally they settled into a longer discussion of morality, intellectualism, atheism and religion. The discussion was centered on morality, namely, "where does your moral standard come from if you have no religion?" As they talked, it became apparent that many of the group did not feel that religion was very important. They felt it necessary to separate their religion (if they had one) from their intellectualism. As they did this, I noticed that they began to take the good qualities from religion and attribute them to whatever intellectual ideal they pleased.

One of their main points can be described by this sentence, attributed to some philosopher: "Christianity was the boat that got us across the river. It has given us its moral standard. Now that we have crossed the river, as it were, we have no more use for the boat." This sentence saddens me.

I hardly think it needs to be said that I was put into a thoughtful mood by this discussion. As I stood outside the house absorbing the exquisite winter evening, my friend Louis also stepped out of the house, and said something I thought profound. Although I can't remember his exact wording his thought was something like, "Discussions like that are the equivalent of building an intellectual labyrinth around yourself, and it very easy to lose yourself inside that labyrinth." How right you are, Louis.

Do we need religion to maintain a high moral standard? Are the atheist countries of Denmark and Sweden on the forefront of human societal evolution? These were the questions being discussed by the book club. But there were some other thoughts that they seemed to have forgotten. I would like share a couple of my ideas I feel were left out last night.

1) Religion is a human need. Every society on Earth, in every part of history, on every part of the globe has had a religion. Now, these religions come in different forms, but they all give their followers something to believe in. Religion cannot be separated from academic life or done away with. It exists outside humanity.

2) Though there is some variance, morality exists across boundaries and cultures and is largely standardized. It is interesting to see how very similar morality is described in different parts of the world. In my experience, morality often consists of some sort of personal sacrifice, a lifestyle free of addictions, consideration for other people, and some set of rules governing procreation. The worldwide and historical prevalence of these moral qualities seems to suggest a common root. A common religious ancestry.

3) Any religion worth its salt should permeate the believers life. If you are truly a believer of a religion, it should be found in every part of your life. It shouldn't be a garment you where when its convenient and cast aside when you wax intellectual.

I will end with this final thought. Intellectualism is not, of itself, bad. Neither is religion. But if one does not reconcile both in his own life, this is when the labyrinths go up. When the balance is lost and you swing too far to one side or the other, you begin to lose focus. You begin to lose a part of yourself. So, be careful. Balance yourself, be happy, and live up to whatever moral standard you subscribe to.