Plognark

Perhaps it's a cultural difference; i'm not sure how England stacks up with Xian fundamentalist issues, but in America it's bloody frightening.

bd-from-kg

Mr. Average:

Is belief itself so wrong?

Yes, in the circumstances you describe. "Mr. Smith" (like almost everyone who adopts a religion) is clearly not interested in making an objective, impartial evaluation of the evidence, but is responding at a "gut" level (call it emotional, spiritual, or what have you) to what he's reading. He finds it fulfilling or satisfying in some way to believe, so he believes. This is an abdication of one's intellectual responsibilities as a (potentially) rational being.

This is all summed up wonderfully in William K. Clifford's classic (1877) essay The Ethics of Belief. I highly recommend reading the whole thing, but here are a few key excerpts:

Enlighten Me

What if Mr. Smith doesn't sufficiently brainwash his children into his belief system and they remain atheists or agnostics? Now Mr. Smith must believe that his own dear children will go to hell. The dear children feel stigmatized in their own family because they know Daddy thinks they're going to Hell....Doesn't sound like a very pretty picture to me...

HaysooChreesto!

Well said. I believe that for the most part your hypothetical Mr. Smith is what most Christians i.e., most people are like.
If only Christians would stay out of politics. Then they enter the business of making law that infringes on the rights of others to lead their own lives as they see fit.

Petetsi

Wrong perhaps, but it has provided the basis for a multibillion dollar industry in the states that has made a more than a few ranting ministers millionaire�s.

Mr. Average lives in a country where there is a state religion (Anglican) and where �belief� and church attendance is relatively low (compared to the states). If Mr. Smith, wants to live a quiet, unobtrusive life serving the poor whose to condemn or interfere?

In America, a country born with a sense that divine providence was paying close attention from the start, we live in a society where according to a 2003 Harris poll, over 92 percent already believe in God (although not the same god), 89 percent believe in miracles and more than two-thirds believe in the devil and hell. Americans are three times as likely to believe in the virgin birth of Jesus (83 percent) as in evolution (28 percent). More than half of the public believes in ghosts. And nearly one-third believes in astrology and in reincarnation?

Americans put ahead of scientific evidence (and truth) notions such as: Alien visitation, feng Shue, occultism, crystal therapy, magnetic therapy, psychic hotlines, ESP, homeopathy, quantum therapy, karma, faith healing, communication with the dead, tarot cards, numerology, and, of course, religious beliefs amongst many others.

Its been suggested that our brains are hard-wired to commit certain kind of critical-thinking errors: Oversimplification, argument from ignorance and the tendency to confuse correlation with causation just to cite just a few of the cognitive errors that make critical thinking the challenge that it is.

But I think it goes deeper than that, religion (read all the Abrahamic religions) caters to a world full of fear and superstition and there is quite a market. Everywhere people are frightened. Threatening shapes lurk at the edges of vision. In the next car, in a parking lot, while pumping gas, maybe waiting for them in the hall with a knife or a sniper�s rifle. There is anthrax, Ricin, mad cow disease, earthquakes, cancer, and airplanes crashing into skyscrapers. Husbands leaving to pick up bagels on a Sunday morning and later dropping a line from Katmandu. Children missing or dead in ditches. People want monsters and ghosts and voices beyond the grave. To believe in the supernatural. Something foreign, intentional, not senseless and familiar as a soccer mom getting shot in the head pumping gas. Satan will always be preferable to uncertainty or confused, violent acts. Little wonder Mr. Smith may welcome the �full armor of God�, to protect him and his family.

Religious belief shares some of the same epistemological shortcomings that many of the beliefs cited share: scant or flawed evidence, belief based on faith alone or, more often, because believing makes us feel good. We are a nation ripe for nearly every religious free-lancer (or con-artist).

Should we confer tax exempt status to every belief system that is based on evidence just as solid as those underpinning Mr. Smith�s? For a tax exempt status alone I might want to establish a Church myself, call it, �The Church of the Gooey Death and Discount House of Worship�, give 20 percent to the poor, keep the rest for maintaining the Church (and if it were large enough after some evangelizing) placing me and my family in a luxurious home or mansion (not that uncommon here). I could claim that God �smiles� down upon me and defy anyone to prove otherwise. If my claims were close enough to �mainstream� Christianity, I would be nearly untouchable.

If �Mr. Smith�, were to go off to a reclusive religious community or a commune to express his �beliefs� and live his life that would be one thing, but here in the states Mr. Smith not only supports these churches but votes, and has Washington�s ear as other posters have noted.

Cheers,
-P-

Heurismus

Wonderful (Genuine) to see people happy like that. Have several Christian friends and even one atheist who sends his kids to a convent school. Tradition he explains. So to the Quessies Mr Average.

My questions then...

Is there *anything* wrong in your opinion with Mr Smith having his faith and believing in God? - No

Even if his faith is based on falseness and exaggeration, does this actually matter, if it makes him feel better about his life and the world?- No

If he harms no one, and only evangelises by living as an example of Christ, not haranguing people, is he doing any harm?- No

Ha ha ha Daemon I like the next bit best, but then you are ready for this aren't you?

If believing in Christ, or Allah etc can lead to this sort of peace of mind, why do so many of you constantly knock Christians? Or is it that you are only knocking the ones that try and evangelise in too forthright manner?

I'll just cite two baboons on this, named Bush, part of the Shrub 'Die nasty'. Atheists cannot be citizens. Why? I don't know, could you please explain?

Starboy

Because the good'ol USofA is a Christian country. Or so says the Bushes. And lots of Americans agreed with'em. Enough to make'm President of the US. Now that a shrub is in power again, as well as the plants in the congress and senate, its high times for the Christians and screw everyone else.

Starboy

Biff the unclean

The OP reminds me of the old chestnut about Hitler making the trains run on time.
So Mr Smith reads the NT and Herr Smith reads Mein Kampf. Both of them must read the book 'with blinders on' so as to overlook all of hate filled parts. Both must abandon critical thinking when comparing what the have read to the world itself.
Mr Smith becomes a Christian, Herr Smith a Nazi. Mr Smith takes part in humanistic pursuits which have nothing to do with Christianity. Herr Smith takes part in improving the infrastructure of the public transportation system, which has nothing to do with Fascism.
Mr Smith says 'Hey I'm giving a bum a bowl of soup. Look how good my beliefs are.' Herr Smith says 'Hey I'm made commuting easy and pleasant. Look how good my beliefs are."
Both Smiths have aided a dreadful institution by participating in public relations promoting it where their individual efforts are credited to the institution.
Both Smiths have abandoned critical thinking
However Herr Smith gets to keep his sense of self worth. He's even told he's a member of the Master Race. Mr Smith loses his and is told that he must have Jesus "save" him as he is incapable of saving himself. So while in my opinion there is a great deal wrong with both Smiths having faith and believing instead of being skeptical and discerning, Mr Smith personally comes out the worse.

Wiploc

It's intellectual promiscuity. If you can believe something harmless without justification, then how are you going to make a distinction for something harmful?



In the real world, faith often does make people feel better. It also often makes them worry about Hellfire, and preach hatred, and teach children to be stupid.



If he doesn't do any harm, then he doesn't do any harm.

This is like asking whether a random purposless suicide bomber would be bad if he didn't do any harm. Yes, it is theoretically possible that everyone affected would have had a worse life without the bomb, but, as a practical matter, people actually would get hurt.

So, the answer to the question you asked is that if he really didn't do any harm, then there wouldn't be anything wrong with what he did. However, that logic applies equally well to the random bomber. And it takes an omniscient person to judge whether the Christian and bomber did hurt anybody. For the rest of us, the non-omniscient types, we have to live with rules, guidelines for maximizing happiness. Thou shalt not do random bombings, and thou shalt not promiscuously believe mythologies are two pretty good such rules; so the Christian and the bomber can be said to have done something wrong by those standards.

crc

focused48

Answering your questions:

Is there *anything* wrong in your opinion with Mr Smith having his faith and believing in God?

Yes, even if Mr. Smith's newfound religiosity has absolutely no influence on the outside world, he does a disservice to himself by believing a rather unremarkable, contradictory, intolerant and sometimes evil text.

Even if his faith is based on falseness and exaggeration, does this actually matter, if it makes him feel better about his life and the world?

Yes it matters. To live your life under the threat of fear and a false set beliefs and to surrender your natural ability reason is probably the most tragic decision that some people make. This is also a question of credulity: Mr. Smith�s collective religion and individual lack of reason could spill over to more earthly matters that could have positively harmful effect if left unchecked. Also, the phrasing of this question makes me wonder if a healthy morphine addiction would have the same effect as religion on Mr. Smith.

If he harms no one, and only evangelises by living as an example of Christ, not haranguing people, is he doing any harm?

Since evangelizing is defined as spreading the Christian faith, yes he is doing harm by spreading a false set of beliefs and by inviting other people to surrender their ability to reason.