Some time ago one of the leftist www.redakcji ordered my performance on "imaginary God." The text has not been used, I do not know whether because of the shear time at which it sent, or for some other reason, the editors chose not to answer the query. Paste text so here (in all good, but tofu is best).
belief in unbelief perished when the dead three" bastions of opposition to religion, "anti-religious Enlightenment mockery, mimicry of science posing for a new secular Absolut (" scientific mind proved unable to compete with religion and philosophy), and of the third, that is: the belief that religion is "an obstacle in the repair of the political world." Fortunately, a good Pole went dry shod through the chaos of nineteenth-century superstition.
But Dawkins' anti-religious pamphlet is sold in Poland more than a good (if, in light of the reading, I can say that any book sold well here.) Over 50,000 copies snapped, the title of the date of issue of the Polish edition continues the quotation czubie bestsellers. What, therefore, disagree? Everything is correct. Mem atheism is changing the face of this earth, while the Party of God on this change reactionary response. Nothing new under the sun. Changes only the global context of the dispute, increasing the chance of a revaluation of all values.
The God Delusion "is a fair measure of the dose of propaganda and ideology, like nothing - the book political. Passionate call for the continuation of the project of enlightenment.
Yes, Dawkins is the nineteenth century. Yes, it is provocative, sometimes unpleasant. Theologians and other well-trained and educated defenders of the Party of God does not bring peace to a respectful ecumenical Unknowable, but a sword confronted ideological coherence and a new proposal for balancing the costs and benefits of being under the influence of religiously primed, fairly widespread episteme us.
inadmissibility: what is it whom? What is the "God Delusion"? Why the hell are they to charge the energy and hope for the ferment around, it seems, long wybrzmiałego dispute (which it gave tons of other day - the nineteenth century, even more than Dawkins himself incarnate - Feuerbach)? Why provoke, attack, sharpened spears secularist? What will the cost of the nineteenth naive hyperactivity ateuszy - followers of religious delusions - a world that already knows that without God and without religion, or move (Kolakowski) that there is no easy retreat from metaphysics in the scientistic ideology dziecięcość (Habermas)? Where is Rome, and where the Crimea, which is where the modern mind (post) humanistic, and where ateo-troglodyci, accept the confession of faith Gagarin, namely, that "God niet?
Dawkins is important, because it is an important subject of old-new dispute on the face of the Earth and the metaphysical status of its surroundings. It is important to the social criticism of the institutions of religion, which Dawkins makes in "The God Delusion." What I found will try to justify.
In the era of intellectual irrationalism tuning of various, mostly religious and postsekularnych provenance, calling for restoration of Dawkins, a paramount reason it is not a matter of socially indifferent.
author of "selfish gene" beats alarm, because as a man of science feel the breath on the back of a retreat from the social conquests of the West. Deeper: the intellectual atmosphere, which in general allowed a man with a output of natural slavery of determination, paving the way toward interpersonal relationships fundowanym the imperative of personal self-determination of each participant playing in social life. Alpha individuals without violence, without the unwanted children, and national intertribal wars, no kings, no lords, without subjects, without exclusion. Without the gods. With reason.
religion is attacked by Dawkins primarily as an institution rooted in the celebration with no-(or, as they want Scientists in Good Books, non-or over-) reason. God transcends human rationality - is perhaps one of the most relevant characteristics analyzed by Dawkins artifact. The idea of \u200b\u200belevating to the skies, whose essence is
niepojętość, they are on a serious social consequences. It's not even that, in the fight to preserve the mystery of the seriousness of religious institutions participated in the (and still commit) acts of violence in heretykach, disarming her majesty (or tell-tale mystery for another variant of the religious order.) Rather go for a lasting stigma on mental wdrukowywane salary those indoctrinated by religious institutions. Religion extents non-criticality (non-criticism), faith "with the word" (the idea deeply rooted in the philosophy of dialogue rozteologizowanej under the sign of Buber, Rosenzweig and Ebner), for which any attempt to rationally control can be deadly. Thus, religion is a force that causes the slowdown, deceleration of historical emancipation of man against the world of its own natural conditions. Religion slow movement toward getting a fuller understanding of natural reality, it is: everything that falls under the procedures of scientific work. Fighting the battle against ignorance, with mental or technical limitations, it is - says Dawkins - indelible part of the religious works. Formerly head just subversives enriched precipitates niewyparzonymi tongues. Today, discretely limited to inoculate people against the giver is not easy to control the virus curiosity about the world, this world. Adoration of the Unknowable, Mystery, the site reflects the social costs of growth potential loss of valuable knowledge about the world. Religion teaches: "virtue is to remain in ignorance" (p. 180).
instrumentation for fixation of Biopolitics control at the disposal of religious institutions, is rich. Dawkins draws attention to a number of tools of this type. One is the traditional - and therefore perennially powerful - the kind of respect of religion and religious faith in public discourse. Respect captured indirectly, only inherited, translated, longevity of the institution concerned. It is worth pointing out this detail, because Dawkins' imaginary God "for the tears often iconoclastic. Widely acknowledged respect for religion and religious faith just because they are ongoing, as particularly effective brakes critical reflection around them.
Respect for religion is in fact consent to its further tabuizację. Because I like talking about religion, because certain things - one way or another grounds, with doubts - just is not fitting to speak publicly on blackmail someone's religious feelings of resentment? Why is it that "our society universally (even by non-believers) is accepted view that religious belief is a domain particularly sensitive, so they must be enforced to protect the thick wall of respect, that they are entitled to immunity absent extraordinary in any other sphere of social life"? (P. 46) Dawkins cites the HL Mencken: "We should respect the religious beliefs of our fellow men, but only in the sense and to the extent to which we respect someone's belief that his wife is a beautiful woman, and children are very clever." So when children start smoking friends, raping and robbing - respect for the feelings of friendship must go into the background axiological validity. Otherwise, the feelings will serve as a gag. Religion is not a sacred cow, and as every sign of social regulation of man on earth, shall be her right to free and fair, rational criticism. One can not but lead it with a nervous breath, bishop, rabbi or imam - and all those who take the truth of every word - behind his back.
This "forced respect" be reproduced in a simple manner. This is one of the many effects of religious indoctrination, which the children are systematically subjected to people who as children were subjected to religious indoctrination. Jesus asked: "let the children come to me," so permit, and the power of God's administration perpetuates from generation to generation. "He died for you able to live "- the content of this type were decorated before the Easter holidays, one thousand newspapers wall in thousands of schools. Dawkins seek in the transmission of subtle forms of masochistic psychomanipulation. He knows the teacher knows and the Jesuit: The child in the early school age is an extremely gifted imaginative, evil memes that infect the permanent part of the mental functions.
Sacrifice of the Cross, blood, spitting and the flagellation, our sins, His suffering, Satan, hell and paradise of eternal fire, eternal glory and majesty - no matter volts hermeneutical theologians the right to Left relativizing biblical literalism of images, religious instruction for children provide a simple and meaningful content bought one for one by an unconscious minor situation clientele. Even if it does not result in a profound indoctrination of religion (and in most cases do not result), is the durability of the transmission and reproduction of spiritual authority based on ideological wdrukowaniu program can be sloppy. (By the way, surprising is the popularity of personalism as a philosophical interpretation of Catholic social teaching, personalism, which elevates the subjectivity of another human being. Where concern about the subjectivity of the child, the unformed child mentally modeled at the discretion of the institution?)
Similarly, the strong opposition raised Dawkins unwittingly reproduced in the habit of labeling language to children in a faith professed by their parents. "How can any decent person could think it fair to label four children through cosmological and theological views of their parents?" But we recognize the impropriety of such a place, happily fictitious signature under the photograph with images of children: "Shadbreed (Keynesian, aged four), Musharaff (monetarist, aged four) and Adele (marksistka, age - four years) "(p. 451), meanwhile, labeled a" Catholic children "swallow normally without pain. "Do not hesitate to fly off the handle, how many times you hear something like that. No little kid is not a Christian or Muslim - at the most is the child of Christian and Muslim parents. " (P. 454)
Since the labeling of children is only half a step to divide and conflicts between, stigmatization and exclusion of otherness. "Religion divides - it is not in doubt and it is also one of the most serious charges against all religious systems. " (P. 351) "Even if religion did not make any other damages, its no way justified, senseless tends to reinforce divisions - consciously cultivated an affirmation of the natural human tendency to favor their own group and reject foreign - enough to hold it as an important weapon of evil on Earth. " (Pp. 255-256)
(Admittedly, a lot more tact was Daniel Dennett in "disenchant" in which almost invites "civilized" religious readers to take their share of responsibility for the excesses of violence in pursuit of their fundamentalist brethren in the faith.)
The God Delusion 'is an outstanding intellectual event. It is rather a hard blow on the table. Dawkins - do not know why the religious opponents of doing it in this respect the plea - does not discover new cards in an old dispute, does not prove non-existence of God. But - in the face of threats by the religious autonomy of the authority of science - that has a strong defense of atheism. Defends him in the old-fashioned style - by frontal criticism of the grounds on which built its strength of religion. Firmly and clearly articulates its weaknesses and related concerns. Perhaps - the passion of a missionary atheist (which, however, does not allow for identification is called a fundamentalist rebours, there are conditions under which Dawkins is willing to discard your hard Darwinism; conditions are not analogous operation for the rejection of the fundamentalist Muslim or Christian - is hidden here the difference between passion and fundamentalism) - moves on issues involving human emotions strongly with the grace of an elephant in a china shop.
validity "imaginary God" is valid is reading widely, discussed, commented, criticized journalism. The book launched a whole series of events and social initiatives that seek restoration of atheism in Western culture. Atheism, which is never a matter of fact he had his five minutes on a democratically managed forum for the exchange of ideas. Atheism, or rather standing for atheism, naturalism, the idea is not crippled in the meantime, peeled of the mystery, is a thoroughbred project with considerable potential światopoglądowym emancipation. The spirit of naturalism comes after utilitarian vision of the good earth for the holy beings (not only) human enough to enjoy high quality of life, which minimizes the pain and suffering to joy and happiness. Possible for all, not to hastily (by religious or any other criterion szowinistyczego) selected. Enjoying the good life here and now - no: elsewhere, and indeed until after his death, but it is forever.
Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, ed. PJ Szwajcer, published by CIS, Warsaw 2007
Michel Onfray, the Treaty ateologiczny, ed. M. Kwaterko, PIW Publications, Warsaw 2008
