John G. Messerly's Blog, page 58
October 6, 2019
Summary: What Are The Best Countries To Live In?
World map of all countries by the inequality-adjusted Human Development Index.
The question “what countries are objectively the best ones to live in?” is relatively easy to answer. Most would agree that such countries, among other things, guard their citizen’s personal safety and allow free expression, provide quality health care, economic prosperity, clean air and water, a good educational and a fair justice system, have minimal government corruption and respects the rule of law, etc.
However, the question “which country is best for me to live in?” is nearly impossible to answer because it introduces so many subjective factors. For instance, do you prefer a country where your family lives, one where a specific language is spoken, or one that has a certain geography or climate? Do you want to be in the countries most immune from global climate change, one most likely to survive a nuclear war, or one with a low cost of living or minimal taxation? So we can’t say definitely which country is best for any individual.
With the above in mind, let’s look at the data. I’ll look at the ten I’ll rank the rankings themselves as either BAD, FAIR, GOOD, OR EXCELLENT. Then, in the end, I’ll aggregate the data and render some conclusions.
1) The United Nations Human Development Index HDI – FAIR ASSESSMENT
This one considers just three dimensions: 1 health assessed by life expectancy at birth; 2 education measured by mean of years of schooling for adults and expected years of schooling for children entering school; and wealth measured by gross national income per capita. In my view, this is not only a fair assessment since it basically focuses on wealth health and education are in large part determined by wealth. According to the 2018 HDI the top twenty-five countries in order were:
1. Norway 2. Switzerland 3. Australia 4. Ireland 5. Germany
6. Iceland 7. Hong Kong 7. Sweden 9. Singapore 10. Netherlands
11. Denmark 12. Canada 13. USA 14. UK 15. New Zealand
16. Finland 17. Belgium 17. Liechtenstein 19. Japan 20. Austria
21. Luxembourg 22. Israel 23. South Korea 23. France 25. Slovenia
In response to the claim that the HDI doesn’t take into account inequality of health, education, and wealth, the United Nations introduced:
2) The UN inequality-adjusted Human Development Index – GOOD ASSESSMENT
The UN states: “The IHDI combines a country’s average achievements in health, education, and income with how those achievements are distributed among country’s population by “discounting” each dimension’s average value according to its level of inequality.” In my view, the main deficiency of this index is that it only considers the same 3 dimensions as the HDI. Still, it is a better measurement than the HDI. Surely you would prefer a country with little inequality and a strong social safety net to one in which you might be either extraordinarily rich or extraordinarily poor. For more see Rawls’ Theory of Justice. According to the 2018 IHDI, the top countries in order were:
1. Iceland 2. Japan 2. Norway 4. Switzerland 5. Finland
6. Sweden 7. Australia 7. Germany 9. Denmark 10. Netherlands
11. Ireland 12. Canada. 13. New Zealand 13. Slovenia 15. Check Republic
16. Belgium 17. Austria 17. UK 19. Singapore 20. Luxembourg
21. Hong Kong 22. France 23. Malta 24. Slovakia 24. USA
Another index recently developed in response to deficiencies in the HDI is the
3) The Social Progress Index SPI – EXCELLENT ASSESSMENT
This index is a product of Social Progress Imperative which defines “social progress as the capacity of a society to meet the basic human needs of its citizens, establish the building blocks that allow citizens and communities to enhance and sustain the quality of their lives, and create the conditions for all individuals to reach their full potential.”
This is one of the most detailed indexes. Social Progress Imperative evaluated hundreds of possible indicators while developing the Social Progress Index, including engaging researchers at MIT to determine what indicators best differentiated the performance of nations. The index combines three basic dimensions each with four components,
1. Basic human needs – 1nutrition and basic medical care; 2water and sanitation;
3shelter; and 4personal safety. Do people have enough food to eat and are they receiving basic medical care? Can people drink clean water and keep themselves clean without getting sick? Do people have adequate housing and utilities? Do people feel safe?
2. Foundations of well-being – 1access to basic knowledge; 2access to information and communication; 3health and wellness; and 4environmental quality. Do people have access to an educational foundation? Can people freely access ideas and information from anywhere around the world? Do people live long and healthy lives? Is society using its basic resources so that they will be available to future generations?
3. Opportunity – 1personal rights; 2personal freedom and choice; 3inclusiveness; 4access to advanced education. Are people’s rights as individuals protected? Are people free to make their own life choices? Is no one excluded from the opportunity to be a contributing member of society? Do people have access to the world’s most advanced knowledge?
Each component was then measured by between three and five specific outcome indicators. This index offers one of the most comprehensive determinations of the extent to which societies promote the flourishing of its citizens. According to the 2019 index, the top countries in order were:
1. Norway 2. Iceland 3. Switzerland 4. Denmark 5. Finland
6. Japan 7. Netherlands 8. Luxembourg 9. Germany 10. New Zealand
11. Sweden 12. Ireland 13. UK 14. Canada 15. Australia
16. France 17. Belgium 18. South Korea 19. Spain 20. Austria
21. Italy 22. Slovenia 23. Singapore. 24. Portugal 25. USA
4) The Legatum Prosperity Index – EXCELLENT ASSESSMENT
The Legatum Institute is a London-based think-tank whose index “is a framework that assesses countries on the promotion of their citizens’ flourishing, reflecting both
wealth and wellbeing. It captures the richness of a truly prosperous life, moving beyond traditional macro-economic measurements of a nation’s prosperity, which rely solely on indicators of wealth such as average income per person …” This too is an excellent assessment.
The criteria used are: 1) Economic Quality 2) Business Environment 3) Governance 4) Education 5) Health 6) Safety & Security 7) Personal Freedom 8) Social Capital and 9) Natural Environment. According to the 2018 index, the top countries in order were:
1. Norway 2. New Zealand 3. Finland 4. Switzerland 5. Denmark
6. Sweden 7. UK 8. Canada 9. Netherlands 10. Ireland
11. Iceland 12. Luxembourg 13. Australia 14. Germany 15. Austria
16. Belgium 17. USA 18. Slovenia 19. Malta 20. France
21. Singapore 22. Hong Kong 23. Japan 24. Portugal 25. Spain
5) The Corruption Perceptions Index CPI – EXCELLENT ASSESSMENT
This is an index published annually by Transparency International since 1995 which ranks countries “by their perceived levels of public level corruption, as determined by expert assessments and opinion surveys.” The CPI generally defines corruption as “the misuse of public power for private benefit”.[2] This is one of the best lists because of its focus on government—if you have a corrupt government it is nearly impossible for citizens to live well. Here are their 2018 rankings:
1. Denmark 2. New Zealand 3. Finland 3. Sweden 3. Switzerland 3. Singapore
7. Norway 8. Netherlands 9. Canada 9. Luxembourg
11. Germany 11. UK 13. Australia 13. Iceland 13. Hong Kong 13. Austria
17. Belgium 18. Ireland 18. Japan 18. Estonia
21. France 22. USA 23. Uruguay 23. UAE 25. Bhutan
6) The Global Peace Index – EXCELLENT ASSESSMENT
(Countries appearing with a deeper shade of green are ranked as more peaceful, countries appearing more red are ranked as most violent.)
Global Peace Index GPI measures and ranks 163 independent states and territories according to their levels of peacefulness. It does so by investigating the extent to which countries are involved in ongoing domestic and international conflicts. It also seeks to evaluate the level of harmony or discord within a nation; ten indicators broadly assess what might be described as safety and security in society.
The assertion is that low crime rates, minimal incidences of terrorist acts and violent demonstrations, harmonious relations with neighboring countries, a stable political scene and a small proportion of the population being internally displaced or refugees can be suggestive of peacefulness. In 2017, 23 indicators, reviewed annually by a panel of experts, were used to establish each country’s peacefulness score.
This is the only assessment that uses factors such as military expenditures, the number of military personnel, nuclear weapons, exports of weapons, etc. This is, in my view, an excellent assessment although it dramatically lowers the ranking of (especially) the USA and Israel. Here are the top countries in their 2019 rankings.
1. Iceland 2. New Zealand 3. Portugal 4. Austria 5. Denmark
6. Canada Sweden 7. Singapore UK 8. Slovenia 9. Japan 10. Switzerland
11. Czechia 12. Ireland 13. Australia 14. Finland 15. Bhutan
16. Malaysia 17. Netherlands USA 18. Belgium 18. Sweden 20. Norway
21. Hungary 22. Germany 23. Slovakia 24.Romania 25. Mauritius
The USA ranks 128th. Israel ranks 146th.
7) The UN World Happiness Report – GOOD ASSESSMENT
The World Happiness Report is an annual publication of the United Nations which ranks national happiness based on respondent ratings of their own lives, which the report also correlates with various life factors. One reservation I have about the index is that happiness is a very subjective criterion. Here are their 2019 rankings:
1. Finland 2. Norway 3. Denmark 4. Iceland 5. Switzerland
6. Netherlands 7. Canada 8. New Zealand 9. Sweden 10. Australia
11. UK 12. Austria 13. Costa Rica 14. Ireland 15. Germany
16. Belgium 17. Luxembourg 18. USA 19. Israel 20. UAE
21. Check Republic 22. Malta 23. France 24. Mexico 25. Chile
8) The Good Country Index – GOOD ASSESSMENT
The Good Country Index is a composite statistic of 35 data points mostly generated by the United Nations. These data points are combined into a common measure which gives an overall ranking, and a ranking in seven categories: 1 Science and Technology 2 Culture 3 International Peace and Security 4 World Order 5 Planet and Climate 6 Prosperity and Equality, and 7Health and Well-being.
The only reason I didn’t rate this as excellent was that one of its authors stated: “The Good Country Index tries to measure how much each country on earth contributes to the planet and to the human race.” While this may be a fine way to measure how good a country is, some would object that they don’t want to live in a country that makes the world better but that makes their lives better. Here is their 2018 list:
1. Finland 2. Netherlands 3. Ireland 4. Sweden 5. Germany
6. Denmark 7. Switzerland 8. Norway 9. France 10. Spain
11. Canada 12. Bulgaria 13. Belgium 14. Estonia 15. UK
16. Luxembourg 17. New Zealand 18. Austria 19. Italy 20. Australia
21. Latvia 22. Cyprus 23. Singapore 24. Japan 25. North Macedonia
The United States ranks 40th.
9) Where To Be Born Index – FAIR ASSESSMENT
Where to be born index 2013 World map
The Economist Intelligence Unit’s where-to-be-born index previously called the quality-of-life index attempts to measure which country will provide the best opportunities for a healthy, safe and prosperous life in the near future. It is based on a method linking the results of subjective life-satisfaction surveys to the objective determinants of quality of life. The main problem I have with this index is that it hasn’t updated since 2013. It also contains a few outliers compared to other lists making it somewhat suspect.
1. Switzerland 2. Australia 3. Norway 4. Sweden 5. Denmark
6. Singapore 7. New Zealand 8. Netherlands 9. Canada 10. Hong Kong
11. Finland 12. Ireland 13. Austria 14. Taiwan 15. Belgium
16. Germany 17. USA 18. UAE 19. South Korea 20. Israel
21. Italy 22. Kuwait 23. Chile 24. Cyprus 25. Japan
10) OECD Better Life Index – FAIR BUT INCOMPLETE ASSESSMENT
This index was developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The recommendations made by this Commission sought to address concerns that standard macroeconomic statistics like GDP failed to give a true account of people’s current and future well-being.
One problem with this index is that it doesn’t include such dimensions as free speech, poverty, economic inequality, access to health insurance, and pollution. The other issue is that it only covers 40 countries. While this has little effect on the top 15 or so countries—who would probably have been ranked there regardless—is that it elevates other countries into the top 40 simply because they were considered. Here are their 2017 rankings:
1. Norway 2. Australia 3. Iceland 4. Canada 5. Denmark
6. Switzerland 7. Netherlands 8. Sweden 9. Finland 10. USA
11. Luxembourg 12. New Zealand 13. Belgium 14. UK 15. Germany
16. Ireland 17. Austria 18. France 19. Spain 20. Slovenia
21. Estonia 22. Check Republic 23. Israel 24. Italy 25. Japan
11) The Human Life Indicator HLI – POOR ASSESSMENT
This indicator also addresses deficiencies in the HDI. For example “The HLI looks at life expectancy at birth but also takes the inequality in longevity into account. If two countries had the same life expectancy, the country with the higher rate of infant and child deaths would have a lower HLI. The main deficiency of this index is its “use of the sole health component of human development [longevity] instead of a composite index.” It measures countries on the most narrow criteria of any of the indexes. According to their methodology, the top twenty-five countries in 2018 were:
1. Hong Kong 2. Japan 3. Iceland 4. Singapore 5. Spain
6. Italy 7. Switzerland 8. Sweden 9. Norway 10. Australia
11. Israel 12. France 13. Netherlands 14. South Korea 15. Luxembourg
16. Finland 17. Canada 18. Austria 19. Ireland 20. Slovenia
21. New Zealand 22. UK 23. Germany 24. Belgium 25. Denmark
12) US News & World Report Best Countries to Live In – POOR ASSESSMENT
This ranking is the worst I have found. Its criteria include suspect categories including:
Adventure: friendly, fun, pleasant climate, scenic, sexy;
Cultural Influence: culturally significant in terms of entertainment, fashionable, happy, has an influential culture, modern, prestigious, trendy
Heritage: culturally accessible, has a rich history, has great food, many cultural attractions
Movers: different, distinctive, dynamic, unique
Power: a leader, economically influential, politically influential, strong international alliances, strong military
Besides the fact that many of these categories are nebulous, some have little to do with the quality of life. And suppose you agree that military power, for example, makes for a good country because it’s supposedly safe from foreign invaders. In fact, you might be less safe because other countries disproportionately target you with nuclear weapons, or you or your family are more likely to die fighting in foreign wars, or all the money spent on your military could have been used to improve health, education, the environment, etc.
But rather than going into detail about the questionable criteria here let me just say that any list that ranks China and Russia as among the best places to live is suspect.
Here are their rankings:
1. Switzerland 2. Japan 3. Canada 4. Germany 5. UK 6. Sweden 7. Australia 8. USA 9. Norway 10. France 11. Netherlands 12. New Zealand 13. Denmark 14. Finland 15. Singapore 16. China 17. Belgium 18. Italy 19. Luxembourg 20. Spain 21. Ireland 22. South Korea 23. UAE 24. Russia 25. Portugal
Conclusion
The above are the most prominent rankings, bringing together many strands of evidence allowing us to draw strong conclusions. And, for the most part, the rankings are relatively consistent. I’ll now aggregate all the excellent, good, and fair rankings.
THE TOP 8 RANKED COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD
Median
Mean
Norway 1, 2, 1, 1, 7, 20, 2, 8, 3 =
2
5
Switzerland 2, 4, 3, 4, 3, 10, 5, 7, 1 =
4
4.3
Denmark 11, 9, 4, 5, 1, 5, 3, 6, 5 =
5
5.4
Finland 16, 5, 5, 3, 3, 14, 1, 1, 11 =
5
6.5
Iceland 6, 1, 2, 11, 13, 1, 4, 36, UR =
5
9.1
Sweden 7, 6, 11, 6, 3, 18, 9, 4, 4 =
6
7.5
New Zealand 15, 13, 10, 2, 2, 2, 8, 17, 7 =
8
8.4
Netherlands 10, 10, 7, 9, 8, 17, 6, 2, 8 =
8
8.5
THE 9TH THRU 15TH BEST RANKED COUNTRIES
Canada 12, 12, 14, 8, 9, 6, 7, 11, 9 =
9
9.7
Ireland 4, 11, 12, 10, 18, 12, 14, 3, 12 =
11
10
Germany 5, 7, 9, 14, 11, 22, 15, 5, 16 =
11
11.5
Australia 3, 7, 15, 13, 13, 13, 10, 20, 2 =
13
10.6
Austria 20, 17, 20, 15, 13, 4, 12, 18, 13, =
13
14.6
UK 14, 17, 13, 7, 11, 45, 11, 15, 27, 14 =
14
17.4
Luxembourg 21, 20, 8, 12, 9, UR, 17, 16, UR =
16
12.8
THE 16TH THRU 20TH RANKED COUNTRIES
Belgium 17, 16, 17, 16, 17, 18, 16, 13, 15, = 16 15.8
Japan 19, 2, 6, 23, 18, 9, 54, 24, 25, 25 = 19 22.6
Singapore 9, 19, 23, 21, 3, 34, 23, 6, UR = 20 17.2
France 23, 22, 16 20, 21, 60, 23, 9, 26 = 22 24.4
USA 13, 24, 25, 17, 23, 128, 19, 40, 17 = 23 31.6
THE 21ST THRU 30TH RANKED COUNTRIES
Slovenia 25, 14, 21, 18, 36, 8, 51, 33, 32 = 25 26.4
Estonia 30, 26, 25, 26, 18, 37, 63, 14, 44 = 26 31.4
Czech Republic 27, 15, 24, 27, 38, 11, 21, 32, 28 = 27 24.6
Spain 26, 37, 17, 25, 41, 32, 36, 10, 29 = 27 26.2
South Korea 22, 29, 23, 35, 55, 45, 57, 26, 19 = 29 34.5
Portugal 41, 42, 18, 24, 30, 3, 77, 30, 30 = 30 32.7
Italy 28, 31, 22, 34, 53, 39, 47, 19, 20 = 31 32.5
Israel 22, 27, 31, 37, 34, 146, 19, 53, 21 = 31 41.3
Cyprus 32, 32, 28, 28, 38, 48, 61, 22, 24 = 32 30.5
Poland 33, 28, 33, 33, 36, 29, 40, 31, 33 = 33 32.8
THE 31ST THRU 40TH RANKED COUNTRIES
UAE 34, 61, 39, 23, 53, 20, 58, 18, 32 = 34 33.8
Costa Rica 63, 60, 34, 31, 48, 33, 13, 34, 30 = 34 37.6
Chile 44, 45, 37, 38, 27, 27, 25, 35, 23 = 35 33.4
Slovakia 38, 24, 35, 32, 57, 23, 39, 28, 35 = 35 34.5
Lithuania 35, 34, 32, 36, 38, 40, 42, 37, 57 = 37 39
Uruguay 55, 50, 41, 30, 23, 34, 31, 49, UR, = 37.5 39.1
Hungary 45, 30, 39, 42, 64, 21, 62, 39, 24 = 39 40.6
Croatia 46, 35, 38, 41, 60, 28, 75, 36, UR = 39.5 44.8
Latvia 41, 33, 36, 40, 41, 35, 53, 21, 48 = 40 38.6
Greece 31, 38, 30, 52, 67, 65, 82, 42, 42 = 42 49.8
OTHER SELECT COUNTRIES RANKED
Malaysia 57, UR, 46, 44, 61, 16, 80, 42, 38 = 44 39.2
Romania, 52, 33, 45, 45, 61, 24, 48, 29, 56 = 45 43.6
Bulgaria 51, 44, 43, 47, 77, 26, 97, 12, 61 = 47 51.3
Argentina 47, 46, 42, 53, 85, 75, 47, 82, 37 = 47 57.1
Belarus, 53, 46, 48, 89, 70, 97, 81, 78, UR = 74 58.1
Montenegro 50, 39, 58, 58, 67, 67, 73, 71, UR = 62.5 60
Colombia 90, 83, 60, 57, 99, 143, 37, 87, 34 = 83 66.6
Russia 49, 40, 62, 96, 138, 154, 68, 41, 72 = 80 68 80
Other select countries not rated for lack of data
If you don’t see your country its because either: 1 I couldn’t amass enough data on it. These include Hong Kong and Malta, which scored very high in some categories; as well as Panama and Barbados, which scored fair in some categories; or 2 I assumed my readers wouldn’t be interested in the worst rated countries which are primarily in Africa.
UR = Unranked
Obviously, these rankings are subject to change. For example, if the UK leaves the European Union Brexit, or if the USA continues on its present course undermining democracy and the rule of law their ranking will go down considerably. On the other hand, perhaps Finland’s GDP will increase and fault them to number one or Iceland will become a bigger player on the world stage and move into the top group.
The key is that while the groupings of countries show a clear difference, a single place in the rankings in insignificant.
Further remarks
1. Don’t place that the number 3 country is better than the number 4 country and so on. But you can have some confidence that the very best or excellent countries are, on the whole, better than the very good or good countries. Similarly, the very good or good countries are definitely better than fair or marginal ones.
Moreover, specifically ranking countries—such that we can say definitely that the 5th best is better than the 6th best is better than the 7th best and so on—is difficult. That’s because people disagree on what evaluative criteria should be used to rate countries and on the relative weight given to those criteria.
2. I originally averaged 8 indexes rather than 7 but decided to ignore the OECD ranking because it only covers 40 countries. While this has little effect on the top 20 countries, it elevates other countries into the top 40 where they might otherwise not be. For example, Russia would have been in the top 40 because they were one of the countries considered. However, when I recalculated there were only slight changes in the rankings and not a single country changed its category.
3. While there may be some island paradise not considered here, I feel relatively confident that most of the countries my readers might consider emigrating too, and many they would never consider emigrated to, have been evaluated.
4. No doubt one can quibble with my methodology. I’m just one guy who spent a lot of time trying to be objective.
5. As one guy with a calculator, feel free to check my math and let me know of any errors.
Final Thoughts/ Food For Thought
The characteristics that the best countries to live in share, among other things, are strong social safety nets, including universal healthcare, respect for political norms especially democracy and the rule of law, and, for the most part, they have few firearms and relatively little religious belief.
October 2, 2019
Science and Religion: A Critique of Religion
Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen), (965–1039)
© Joshua H. Shrode – Reprinted with Permission
Alhazen was one of the great Arabian lights during that time when the Qur’an was interpreted by those in power to encourage science…well, “science” is overly generous. There doesn’t seem to be a precisely equivalent word. More accurately, it was interpreted to encourage the pursuit of various knowledge(s), knowledge of nature, religion, math, etc.
To put this in historical context, the Caliph Harun al-Rashid (around 800 AD) mandated that scholars from around the world gather together in the House of Wisdom in Baghdad and translate the classical knowledge of ancient Greece and Rome into Arabic and thus enable the transmission of the gains of science into the Islamic world. Bootstrapping, if you will, a thousand years of research into the empire.
Scholars at an Abbasid library
It seems two passages have been cited which were interpreted at the time to enjoin followers to seek knowledge.
“Travel throughout the earth and see how He brings life into being” (Q.29:20)
“Behold in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the alternation of night and day, there are indeed signs for men of understanding …” (Q.3:190)
Contributions to the corpus of human understanding wasn’t simply an Arabic version of these surviving works, though this was a feat of epic proportions in its own right, but real original scholarship into refining the scientific method, mathematics, optics, medicine, mechanics, astronomy, etc. was a direct consequence of these imperial edicts and the divine and imperial protections granted to scientists.
Yet continued contributions from Islamic scientists did not persist beyond the 15th century. Today, sadly, it currently falls well below statistical expectations relative to the general population for…precisely the same reason that it flourished. Religious leaders interpreted the Qur’an to prohibit such heretic investigations into the regularity of nature as this would imply a limit upon God or some other rationale that defies reason but solidifies a grip on power.
This is one of innumerable, heartbreaking examples of the incalculable consequences of believing certain humans can infallibly interpret an infallible deity. That their pronouncements are Truth. And that whatever science or any other religion says, is false. Sound familiar? That God communicates to his creation via an inherently fallible medium — the written form of a dynamic, living, constantly evolving human language — necessarily creates subjective interpretations of the relationship between Islam and science.
Work in the observatorium of Taqi ad-Din
And so only a short time later, we see the demolition of Taqi al-Din’s great Constantinople observatory in Galata. An observatory which was “comparable in its technical equipment and its specialist personnel with that of his celebrated contemporary, the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe.” But while Brahe’s observatory “opened the way to a vast new development of astronomical science,” Taqi al-Din’s was demolished by a squad of Janissaries, “by order of the sultan, on the recommendation of the Chief Mufti,” sometime after 1577 CE.
The good lord giveth and he taketh away…or maybe the learning is to not piss off the Chief Mufti or he’ll issue an interpretation that deprives humanity of untold discoveries of inestimable value for all eternity. The time lost can never be regained. That kind of evil can only be done in the name of God.
How odd that a compassionate God uses such a mode … a book … to communicate with his mostly illiterate creation. By odd, I mean ridiculous…not of God but of us to look at a book written in a real human language and think, “Perfect! Obviously God’s word!” A real human language is a constantly evolving thing. Meanings drift. Spellings change. Pronunciation shifts. Metaphors and even definitions lose their intelligibility or gain totally different ones.
Fortunately, the Qur’an says it will tell you when it is to be taken literally and when figuratively … and then doesn’t. Nor does it say when it should be taken historically or anecdotally or mystically or any of the ways in which a text can be read. Why would God choose such a terrible way to reveal himself?
A truly good God would just speak to us … all of us .. whenever we had a question. When someone was misrepresenting his intent, he’d correct them in real-time and discuss why he feels a certain way or gave such an injunction or command or allowed such evil to occur due to some greater good. If he did suffer himself to write a book it would be self-translating and modify itself to the belief system of the reader such that it could reveal itself with the clarity and distinctness of raw uninterpreted sense data. We could still chose to believe or not believe, worship or not worship, follow or not follow of our own free will but there would be no disagreement that God was real and this is what he says about himself and his creation. In fact, this is the only way a good God, a compassionate God, a God who did not revel in billions of blind men women and children stumbling in ignorance towards their eternal doom, would act.
We call this “informed consent”. When I have more information and more knowledge I can make better choices or at least make more informed choices. As I’m writing this now, I am being misinterpreted by every reader at some point in my argument. But anyone need only ask and I’ll clarify…personally. How is it that I, a being so much more limited than God, can do what God never does? I want people to interact with as accurate an interpretation of my ideas as is possible. To do that most effectively, I must know that misunderstandings will happen and I will try to correct them to the best of my ability. If I am unwilling to clarify even the grossest misunderstandings, I cannot hold someone responsible for failing to understand my intent or my belief.
The assumptions in the quote from the Qur’an above are manifold but I’ll only focus on two. The first is that it is God who defines whether the pursuit of knowledge is good or not. Second, is the bold claim that whatever we find … it either is God or is attributable to God.
To the first, I say, “In translating, Euthyphro, you seem to have forgotten to read it.” Divine Command Theory is either the height of irrationality or a dark Gestapo morality of which I want no part. Adoption of it as justification for your morality precludes any honest discussion. If this is the case, good luck to you Sir as you sally forth in your Quixotic quest to mix reason and unreason and come up with Truth.
Yet this is what we see in one religion after another. The pursuit of Knowledge should be done because it is an expression of an essential feature of humanity, not because God told us to go do it. What a wretched thought, a scientist forced to investigate something not out of curiosity or passion or desire to understand and possibly make the world better but because God commanded it and so I must obey. Yet another example of how religion poisons by usurping authentic motivations and inserting some divine autocratic command.
To the second assumption, that whatever we find is God, well then fine I say. God is the sum total of the product of scientific inquiry a.k.a. the universe. Great, what we haven’t found is some immaterial, timeless, spaceless, mind with limitless powers either generating or sustaining any part of reality, so until such evidence becomes available, we’ll hold off on those attributes. What we also found is that mankind creates God and gods as a result of an overactive yet evolutionarily useful propensity to assign agency where there is none.
Unfortunately, we decided at some point that our stories were Truth and that science was a threat because both make claims about the natural world and often these claims are in conflict. There is a battle for the future of humanity. If Science wins, we may actually have a future. We will at least face our problems in the here and now and tackle them in a manner up to the task and not colored by theological squeamishness. If Theism wins, then God help us all. My money, as much as it saddens me to say, is on theism stamping out progress. Theism has a long and glorious dalliance with fear and has cultivated its use to high art. And as science has shown, fear is the most motivating of forces.
September 29, 2019
Gun-related Deaths in the USA
Pursuant to my recent post, “Guns and God,” here are a few back of the envelope calculations to put the issue in perspective.
(Source: Wikipedia)
The US had approximately 40,000 gun-related deaths in 2017. That figure has been relatively consistent since 1968, the first year the CDC has online data.
Let’s put that in context. The USA lost 58,000 troops in the Vietnam War, most in the ten-year period between 1963 thru 1972. In that same ten-year span, nearly 400,000 Americans died from gun-related deaths in the USA. That’s right, about 8 times as many Americans died from gun violence in the United States during that ten-year period as did American soldiers in the Vietnam War.
Or consider that the total USA combat death in ALL the wars the US has ever been in total about 667,000. That figure rises to about 1,500,000 if you include non-combat death. Thus, in the fifty-year period from 1968 to 2018 more Americans died in the USA from gun violence than died in all the was American has ever fought! Almost 2 million Americans have died from gun-related violence in the last 50 years.
In that same time guns haven’t saved anyone in the US from political tyrants. Why is that? Because guns don’t protect US citizens from the might of the US military or, perhaps even more importantly, from the huge data sets that enhance the sophisticated techniques of psychological manipulation/propaganda used by authoritarians to control their citizens.
There is of course much more to say about all this. But you are much, much more likely to die from either suicide or murder in the USA than in other developed countries. In fact, the rate of gun-related deaths in the USA is more than 100 times higher than in some countries:
Gun-related deaths per 100,000 population for selected countries:
Singapore 0.025
Japan 0.06
Iceland 0.07
South Korea 0.08
United Kingdom 0.23
Kuwait 0.36
Cuba 0.5
Spain 0.62
Germany 0.99
Canada 2.0
Mexico 7.64
United States 12.21
Colombia 20.38
Here’s another great way to look at this from an article in the New York Times:
Being killed with a gun here:
Is about as likely as
dying of ________ in the U.S.
Deaths per mil.
El Salvador
Heart attack
446.3
Mexico
Pancreatic cancer
121.7
United States
Car accident*
31.2
Chile
Motorcycle accident
14.3
Israel
Building fire
7.5
Canada
Alcohol poisoning
5.6
Ireland
Drowning in a lake, river or ocean
4.8
Netherlands
Accidental gas poisoning
2.3
Germany
Contact with a thrown or falling object
2.1
France
Hypothermia
2.0
Austria
Drowning in a swimming pool
1.9
Australia
Falling from a building or structure
1.7
China
Plane crash
1.6
Spain
Exposure to excessive natural heat
1.6
New Zealand
Falling from a ladder
1.5
Poland
Bicycle-car crash
1.1
England
Contact with agricultural machinery
0.9
Norway
Accidental hanging or strangulation
0.9
Iceland
Electrocution
0.6
Scotland
Cataclysmic storms
0.5
South Korea
Being crushed or pinched between objects
0.4
Japan
Lightning strike
0.1
Note: Rates are averages of data available from 2007 to 2012; car accidents include car occupants only; not van, truck, motorcycle or bus accidents. Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Small Arms Survey (Note also that this chart is for gun-related murders and doesn’t include gun-related suicides.
Finally, if you want to see the more statistics displayed with great graphics see the following link from the Giffords Law Center has done a great job.
September 25, 2019
Guns and God
© Darrell Arnold Ph.D.– (Reprinted with Permission)
https://darrellarnold.com/2019/08/04/...
Here’s a to-be-expected reaction to the [recent] mass shooting in El Paso … The governor of Texas states “The problem is not guns, it’s hearts without God.” People like the governor who propose this view—and you’ll hear it all day long … on Fox—are not phased in the least by the fact that Sweden, which is 50%-85% agnostic and atheist, has a homicide rate four to five times lower than ours. In fact, you’ll see an array of European counties with high rates of atheism and agnosticism have homicide rates four to six times lower than that in the US. Conversely, some countries with higher percentages of religious than the US (like Brazil) have higher homicide rates. But facts be damned! Our Republican politicians will be highlighting it and news media will again be reporting it as if it had some value. It’s a part of the US mass delusion—treated as a rational explanation.
This governor … is not some fringe figure but the leader of the second most populous state in the United States. He’s also just one of multiple Republican “leaders” we’ll hear today who is doing the same thing. And this is just one of many issues about which the governor and those like him are contributing to mass delusion. We see similar Republican talking points on climate change. The news will report non-scientific views on this [topic] too as if they deserve merit because they are widespread. Widespread views for which there is no good evidence don’t deserve equal coverage with ideas for which there is factual support. The US media will nonetheless pretend they do and fuel the flames of ignorance. Mass delusion in these cases is cultivated by disingenuous politicians and mass media.
September 21, 2019
What Is Socialism in 2020?
© Darrell Arnold Ph.D.– (Reprinted with Permission)
https://darrellarnold.com/2019/08/06/...
We can see the mudslinging already. Trump’s attacks on Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, Ilhan Omar and other members of the “squad” as left extremists is just setting the tone for the 2020 election season. Regardless of who wins the primary, Bernie Sanders (the only avowed Democratic Socialist), Elisabeth Warren, or others — Trump will be casting them as socialists. This is part of his needed strategy. Given his unfavorables as the only recent president to never have achieved even a 50% favorability rating, he knows that his path to a second term is through scaremongering. He has to make the other candidate, whoever it is, seem scarier than he is. How will the candidate supported by Vladimir Putin do it? By calling up the specter of totalitarian socialism.
We all know the old Republican trope. Those who oppose laissez-faire capitalism are not just proponents of a welfare state or Keynesian economics, but of socialism, maybe communism. But socialism, of course, is a rather complex word. Trump hopes to capitalize on that complexity, and the darkness associated with some forms of it.
Of course, Bernie Sanders and all the other Democrats reject all forms of authoritarianism. One of their main talking points and grave concerns is precisely that Trump is working in a way that authoritarians often have in early stages, undermining the balance of powers, threatening political opponents, summoning up violence, trying to silence criticism by attacking the independent media. It’s quite easy to make the case that each of the Democratic candidates has less of an authoritarian impulse than Trump.
But what about their economic policies? Are they proposing the abdication of private property? No. The state ownership of all forms of production? No. In what way are they socialist then? Warren says flatly that she isn’t. But what does she want? It turns out to look a lot like what Sanders wants — namely policies that are very much like those of Social Democracies that emerged in Europe in the mid-20th century. These are policies can be seen in Germany, Sweden, and France, among other places. In each of those countries, everyone has property rights. Everyone has freedom of speech and the other typical civil liberties. In fact, each of these countries routinely ranks higher than the US on the major quality of life indexes of the UN.1 Now, are these countries socialist? Not in any traditional sense, though socialist and Social Democratic parties in each of these states helped them to develop the policies that they have.
So as Trump continues his scaremongering, this is what needs to be kept in mind. There is not one Democratic candidate on the left, even Bernie Sanders, who is advocating for anything other than what has just been outlined — policies that allow private entrepreneurs, protect property rights yet that see a need to regulate businesses and legislate policies that better ensure higher levels of education, healthcare policies that increase average life expectancy, corporate policies that secure worker safety and lead to a stronger more stable economy that doesn’t primarily aim to benefit millionaires but that focuses on the well-being of working people (while still having room for plenty of people who are millionaires).
The problem with the term “socialism” today is in some ways similar to that of the term “capitalism.” Neither word means what it once did. Just as some speak of various forms of socialism and include these Democratic Socialist countries in that categorization, others speak of various forms of capitalism and include these very same countries. In this latter context, we hear of Nordic State Capitalism, for Sweden, for example, or more generally “social capitalism.” Are these countries really socialist or capitalist? Well, in the traditional senses, they’re neither. Like the United States, they have politically controlled economies. But they’ve seen the need for more controls than the US has.
As we are now faced with 1.5 trillion dollars in student loan debt, a healthcare system that fails to cover all Americans while costing about twice as much as that in the other counties mentioned, an administration that denies climate change and is not even attempting to address it and burgeoning debt because of wasteful tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, the time is ripe for a change in our politics — namely for a politics done less with a view to corporate interests and more with a view to the public interest. At the moment our greatest threat comes from an administration that is working precisely in the opposing direction. No Democrat in the field is as anywhere near as frightening as that.
_________________________________________________________________________
Some recent indexes have criticized the UN Human Development Index since it considers changes in three domains: economics, education and health. Other indexes include the human life indicator or the social progress index. I believe the very best index is the”Inequalit-adjusted HDI published by the United Nations. It 2018 report ranks the USA 24th.
September 15, 2019
Ilhan Omar: “It Is Not Enough to Condemn Trump’s Racism”
Ilhan Omar, a Democratic congresswoman from Minnesota, recently penned a thoughtful and moving op-ed in the New York Times, “It Is Not Enough to Condemn Trump’s Racism.”
Her main thesis is that “the nation’s ideals are under attack, and it is up to all of us to defend them.” Let me begin by stating that her coherent essay and uplifting biography stand in stark contrast to the vile inanities and the “born with a silver spoon in his mouth” bio of our supreme leader. According to Wikipedia, Congresswoman Omar
was born in Mogadishu on October 4, 1982,[5][6] and spent her early years in Baidoa,
Somalia.[7][8] … Her father Nur Omar Mohamed … worked as a teacher trainer.[9] Her mother, Fadhuma Abukar Haji Hussein … died when Ilhan was two.[10][11][12][13] She was raised by her father and grandfather thereafter.[14] … She and her family fled Somalia to escape the war and spent four years in a Dadaab refugee camp in … Kenya, near the Somali border.[15][16][17]
After … arriving in New York in 1992,[18] Omar’s family … secured asylum in the U.S. in 1995 … before moving to … Minneapolis,[12] where her father worked first as a taxi driver and later for the post office.[12] Her father and grandfather emphasized the importance of democracy during her upbringing, and at age 14 she accompanied her grandfather to caucus meetings, serving as his interpreter.[14][19] She has spoken about school bullying … She recalls gum being pressed into her hijab, being pushed down stairs, and physical taunts while she was changing for gym class.[12] … Omar became a U.S. citizen in 2000 when she was 17 years old.[20][12]
Omar … graduated from North Dakota State University with a bachelor’s degree, majoring in political science and international studies in 2011.[22][19] Omar was a Policy Fellow at the University of Minnesota‘s Humphrey School of Public Affairs.[23]
Her op-ed begins thus
Throughout history, demagogues have used state power to target minority communities and political enemies, often culminating in state violence. Today, we face that threat in our own country, where the president of the United States is using the influence of our highest office to mount racist attacks on communities across the land …
Last week, as President Trump watched the crowd at one of his rallies chant “Send her back,” aimed at me and my family, I … couldn’t help but remember the horrors of civil war in Somalia that my family and I escaped, the America we expected to find and the one we actually experienced.
The president’s rally will be a defining moment in American history. It reminds us of the grave stakes of the coming presidential election: that this fight is not merely about policy ideas; it is a fight for the soul of our nation. The ideals at the heart of our founding — equal protection under the law, pluralism, religious liberty — are under attack, and it is up to all of us to defend them.
Having survived civil war in my home country as a child, I cherish these values. In Somalia’s capital, Mogadishu, I saw grade-school children as young as me holding assault rifles in the streets. I spent four years in a refugee camp in Kenya, where there was no formal schooling or even running water. But my family and I persevered, fortified by our deep solidarity with one another, the compassion of others and the hope of a better life in the United States.
(Again the contrast between her biography and Trump’s despicable, detestable, vile character despite or because of a life of privilege is enough to make one cry out, “Is there any justice in this world?” Unfortunately, I know the answer to that question is no.)
Congresswoman Omar says that despite the fact that she suffered prejudice as a black, Muslim, immigrant she values that democracy provides a means to make society better. (As an aside, my mother always wore a scarf. That the hijab upsets people reveals the supremacy of the reptilian brain over higher brain function. It’s a damn scarf.)
But of course, the promise of democracy is today under threat through voter suppression, ignoring of subpoenas from Congress, the use of “overtly racist rhetoric,” and more. The reasons for the weaponizing of democracy are obvious. Racism is a classic means of dividing people who should be uniting against the extraordinarily wealthy elite. As Omar puts it:
Every time Mr. Trump attacks refugees is a time that could be spent discussing the president’s unwillingness to raise the federal minimum wage for up to 33 million Americans. Every racist attack on four members of Congress is a moment he doesn’t have to address why his choice for labor secretary has spent his career defending Wall Street banks and Walmart at the expense of workers. When he is launching attacks on the free press, he isn’t talking about why his Environmental Protection Agency just refused to ban a pesticide linked to brain damage in children.
His efforts to pit religious minorities against one another stem from the same playbook. If working Americans are too busy fighting with one another, we will never address the very real and deep problems our country faces — from climate change to soaring inequality to lack of quality affordable health care.
(I agree. Racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, religious bigotry, etc. have always been used by the powerful to divide those who might challenge their wealth and power.)
Ms. Omar calls on us to listen to “the better angels of our nature.” As she concludes:
The proudest moments in our history — from the Emancipation Proclamation to the civil rights movement to the struggle against fascism — have come when we fight to protect and expand basic democratic rights. Today, democracy is under attack once again. It’s time to respond with the kind of conviction that has made America great before.
Brief reflections – Of course, this well-written essay won’t change the reptilian minds that follow their cult leader. They are sheep, being led to the slaughter by (almost exclusively) men who don’t care about them at all. They applaud those who want to take their health-care away and dismantle the rest of the very limited social safety net this country offers. They support those who want all the wealth and power of society for themselves. They cheer his cruelty to their (perceived) enemies, not realizing they will get nothing from him and his kind. As Bob Dylan wrote they are only “pawns in the game” of the rich and powerful.
September 8, 2019
Quotes Attacking Religon
The Yazılıkaya sanctuary in Turkey, with the twelve gods of the underworld
My recent post linked to a few of the many essays I’ve written on religions. For those who want an even briefer summary of my views here are a few quotes that exemplify them. I should note that I’ve had many friends who were practitioners of various religions. While I disagree with them, I also recognize that I could be mistaken.
There is no point beating around the bush. Supernatural concepts have no philosophical warrant. Furthermore, it is not that such concepts are displaced only if we accept, from the start, a naturalistic or scientific vision of things. There simply are no good arguments—theological, philosophical, humanistic, or scientific—for beliefs in divine beings, miracles, or heavenly afterlives. ~Owen Flanagan
There is no greater social evil than religion. It is the cancer in the body of humanity. Human credulity and superstition, and the need for comforting fables, will never be extirpated, so religion will always exist, at least among the uneducated. The only way to manage the dangers it presents is to confine it entirely to the private sphere, and for the public domain to be blind to it in all but one respect: that by law no one’s private beliefs should be allowed to cause a nuisance or an injury to anyone else. ~A. C. Grayling
The fact that so little of the findings of modern science is prefigured in Scripture to my mind casts further doubt on its divine inspiration. ~Carl Sagan
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful. ~Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Emotional excitement reaches men through tea, tobacco, opium, whisky, and religion. ~George Bernard Shaw
The time appears to me to have come when it is the duty of all to make their dissent from religion known. ~John Stuart Mill
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. ~Blaise Pascal
Fear of things invisible is the natural seed of that which every one in himself calleth religion. ~Thomas Hobbes
The aim of a religious movement is to inflict a malady on society, then offer the religion as a cure. ~Eric Hoffer
If you want to make a little money, write a book. If you want to make a lot of money, create a religion. ~L. Ron Hubbard
Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous. ~David Hume
Religion … the universal … neurosis of humanity. ~Sigmund Freud
Religion is all bunk. ~Thomas Edison
There is nothing I congratulate myself on more heartily than on never having joined a sect. ~Erasmus
The memory of my own suffering has prevented me from ever shadowing one young soul with the superstitions of the Christian religion. ~Elizabeth Cady Stanton
I count religion but a childish toy and hold there is no sin but ignorance.
~Christopher Marlowe
Religion is the opiate of the masses. ~Karl Marx
Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith, I consider a capacity for it terrifying and absolutely vile. ~Kurt Vonnegut
These [religious ideas] are given out as teachings, are not precipitates of experience or end-results of thinking: they are illusions, fulfillments of the oldest, strongest and most urgent wishes of mankind. ~Sigmund Freud
I am myself a dissenter from all known religions, and I hope that every kind of religious belief will die out. Religion is based . . . mainly on fear . . . fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand. . . . My own view on religion is that of Lucretius. I regard it as a disease born of fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race. ~Bertrand Russell
The whole thing is so patently infantile, so foreign to reality, that to anyone with a friendly attitude to humanity it is painful to think that the great majority of mortals will never be able to rise above this view of life. ~Sigmund Freud
Religion stalks across the face of human history, knee-deep in the blood of innocents, clasping its red hands in hymns of praise to an approving God. ~Philip Appleman
Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration—courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and, above all, love of the truth. ~H.L. Mencken
Religion is a byproduct of fear. For much of human history, it may have been a necessary evil, but why was it more evil than necessary? Isn’t killing people in the name of God a pretty good definition of insanity? ~Arthur C. Clarke
No man who ever lived knows any more about the hereafter … than you and I; and all religion … is simply evolved out of chicanery, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
~Edgar Allan Poe
I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort to take away the power of rational decision, to drain people of their free will—and a hell of a lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all. For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain. We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes. ~Gene Roddenberry
During many ages there were witches. The Bible said so. The Bible commanded that they should not be allowed to live. Therefore the Church, after doing its duty in but a lazy and indolent way for 800 years, gathered up its halters, thumbscrews, and firebrands, and set about its holy work in earnest. She worked hard at it night and day during nine centuries and imprisoned, tortured, hanged, and burned whole hordes and armies of witches, and washed the Christian world clean with their foul blood. Then it was discovered that there as no such thing as witches, and never had been. One does not know whether to laugh or to cry. ~Mark Twain
Every sensible man, every honorable man, must hold the Christian sect in horror. Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected the world. If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities. Superstition, born of paganism and adopted by Judaism, invested the Christian Church from earliest times. All the fathers of the Church, without exception, believed in the power of magic. The Church always condemned magic, but she always believed in it: she did not excommunicate sorcerers as madmen who were mistaken, but as men who were really in communication with the devil. Nothing can be more contrary to religion and the clergy than reason and common sense. ~Voltaire
Man is a marvelous curiosity . . . he thinks he is the Creator’s pet . . . he even believes the Creator loves him; has a passion for him; sits up nights to admire him; yes and watch over him and keep him out of trouble. He prays to him and thinks He listens. Isn’t it a quaint idea ~Robert G. Ingersoll
To abdicate from the rule of reason and substitute for it an authentication of belief by the intentness and degree of conviction with which we hold it can be perilous and destructive. Religious beliefs give a spurious spiritual dimension to tribal enmities … It goes with the passionate intensity and deep conviction of the truth of a religious belief, and of course of the importance of the superstitious observances that go with it, that we should want others to share it – and the only certain way to cause a religious belief to be held by everyone is to liquidate nonbelievers. The price in blood and tears that mankind generally has had to pay for the comfort and spiritual refreshment that religion has brought to a few has been too great to justify our entrusting moral accountancy to religious belief. ~Sir Peter Brian Medawar
Since the early days, [the church] has thrown itself violently against every effort to liberate the body and mind of man. It has been, at all times and everywhere, the habitual and incorrigible defender of bad governments, bad laws, bad social theories, bad institutions. It was, for centuries, an apologist for slavery, as it was an apologist for the divine right of kings. ~H.L. Mencken
History does not record anywhere or at any time a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help. But, like dandruff, most people do have a religion and spend time and money on it and seem to derive considerable pleasure from fiddling with it. ~Robert A. Heinlein
Nietzsche taught me to distrust every optimistic theory. I knew that [the human] heart has constant need of consolation, a need to which that super-shrewd sophist the mind is constantly ready to minister. I began to feel that every religion which promises to fulfill human desires is simply a refuge for the timid, and unworthy of a true man. … We ought, therefore, to choose the most hopeless of world views, and if by chance we are deceiving ourselves and hope does exist, so much the better. At all events, in this way man’s soul will not be humiliated, and neither God nor the devil will ever be able to ridicule it by saying that it became intoxicated like a hashish-smoker and fashioned an imaginary paradise out of naiveté and cowardice—in order to cover the abyss. The faith most devoid of hope seemed to me not the truest, perhaps, but surely the most valorous. I considered the metaphysical hope alluring bait which true men do not condescend to nibble. I wanted whatever was most difficult, in other words most worthy of man, of the man who does not whine, entreat, or go about begging. ~ Nikos Kazantzakis
September 1, 2019
Essays Against Religion
In Plato‘s Apology, Socrates (pictured) was accused by Meletus of not believing in the gods.
I am myself a dissenter from all known religions, and I hope that every kind of religious belief will die out. Religion is based . . . mainly on fear . . . fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand. . . . My own view on religion is that of Lucretius. I regard it as a disease born of fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race. ~Bertrand Russell
I have recently let some of my readers express their views on religion. I thank them for their contributions. I would also like to say that I’ve had many friends who were religious. But if anyone is interested in my views on religion they have been expressed multiple times over the years. So, rather than respond to all the specific points my readers have made, here are a few links to my own work on the topic.
A Philosopher’s Lifelong Search for Meaning – Part 2 – Religion and Meaning
My Views on Religion
Paul Henri Thiry, Baron d’Holbach, an 18th-century advocate of atheism.
I have recently let some of my readers express their views on religion. I thank them for their contributions. If anyone is interested in my views on religion they have been expressed multiple times over the years. Here are a few links to my own work on the topic.
A Philosopher’s Lifelong Search for Meaning – Part 2 – Religion and Meaning
August 26, 2019
Science and Religion: A Not So Sympathetic View of Religion
Science and Religion portrayed to be in harmony in the Tiffany window Education (1890).
In response to Alhazen’s views covered in my last post, Professor Darrell Arnold penned this thoughtful reply.
You make various points in your post, underlining the value of a religious, or perhaps we should say spiritual, mindset. Your main point seems to be that scientific and religious explanation, or religious life, inhabit different domains and fulfill different needs. And you argue, let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
I agree with you that religion in some cases serves functions that you allude to. Some people are deeply committed to religion because they see it serving fundamental needs that science doesn’t serve. These are needs for a personal sense of connection with something greater than themselves or for connection to a caring community.
However, religion all too often it doesn’t seem to serve those purposes at all. For Jason, for example, and clearly for many others, religion has largely been oppressive, undermining free-thinking and even empathy. Jason may wish to speak for himself. But his experience of religion doesn’t appear to be like the one you talk about. His experience is that his religion supported racism, homophobia, xenophobia, and more. Further, it didn’t support intellectual development or curiosity. Rather, it claimed a dogmatic solution to every problem. Jason’s experience with religion is similar to that of many others. Now having this experience, are you suggesting that Jason or others like him should nonetheless continue to look within religion for some reserves of truth because those are uniquely provided by religion?
I do not doubt that some — with strong religious impulses — feel a need to continue on some kind of religious quest, and possibly to rely on religion to address some of life’s questions that evade science. Various people seem to me to do this with a spirit of honesty. But I guess I don’t think religion is necessary for these purposes — as the source of connection or meaning, or for building community, or certainly for ethical action.
I do think one of the issues with secularism is that it often does not do a very effective job of helping to meet some of the needs that religion does meet for some — of providing a sense of purpose, or a sense of belonging within the world, or a sense of community. This failure means that some secularists retreat from their communities and only are concerned about taking care of themselves. This doesn’t seem to have afflicted Jason. But in any case, I don’t agree that religion is the only way to address those failures. And in fact, many forms of religious life don’t solve but exacerbate the very problems mentioned. Think of the high incidence of suicide among transgender and homosexual religious youth.
Looking at the demographics of global population growth, I don’t expect the eclipse of religion anytime soon. So I hope that religions more seriously take up the needs that you mention than they now do and that they play a less adversarial role with science. If there are two domains, religion, too, needs to respect the one of science.
Unfortunately, a look at demographics doesn’t lead me to think that religion will generally develop in these ways. Rather, it will develop much more in alignment with the way that opponents of religion see it working. It will all too often continue to offer simplistic dogmatic answers to questions scientific and non-scientific. It will all too often continue to defend bigotry, homophobia, and xenophobia in the name of God and truth. It will offer insular communities. For that, I’ve little hope that the world will become increasingly secular, with populations of people with mindsets apparently similar to Jason’s, such as we find in Scandinavia. That’s a pity because it is, on the whole, those nations that have the most social forms of political and economic development and that have taken up climate change and environmental concerns seriously.
I’m with William James that religion meets a unique need for some, one not met by science. These tolerant forms of non-dogmatic religion will surely play a role for many in our immediate future as well. But many of the most humane people I have known have found no need for the kind of experience of the transcendent that James talks about. And they’ve no need for the kind of malformed community that religions all too often form.
For some of those, forms of community are lacking. Secularists need to do more to facilitate such forms of community and to emphasize possibilities for collective action in organizations like the Sierra Club or other such groups. The world we also be a better place if more people did what John does and tried to write clearly and approachably about questions of meaning from a secular perspective, so that those who find that religion does not resonate with them have some non-religious insights to draw on — the way apparently Jason has — in ways that give them a greater sense of a meaningful life. One of the most regrettable realities is that when people are going through individual crises, it is often fundamentalist religions that are first available to offer them (thoughtless) answers and entry into (malformed) communities.
To get back to your baby/bathwater analogy — if an analogy of that sort is appropriate, I’m not sure how much of religion is in the bathwater. Maybe meaning and value beyond instrumentalist reason are. But this, it seems, can be found in various ways.
