A friend of mine (I know you don't believe me already but it's true) recently gave me a copy of Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion" to read (and which I returned - just so you don't think I am becoming a disciple or anything).
I will say straight out that I was not looking forward to this because from what I have heard buzzing about, Mr. Dawkins has made a religion out of Atheism and, frankly, I want no part of a war between religions whatever they are named.
I will also confess that much of what he wrote is incomprehensible to me. My neurons simply aren't connected the same way his are.
What did capture my attention was his reference to a 1963 survey of 1,000 Israeli children. Here's the general gist.
When presented with the story of Jericho, these kids were asked:
- Do you think that Joshua, and the Sons of Israel acted right or not? Explain your view.
- Suppose the Israeli army conquers an Arab village in battle. Do you think it would be proper to act against the inhabitants as did Joshua with the people of Jericho and Makkedah? Explain your view.
The results were:
- Total approval - 60%
- Partial approval or disapproval - 20%
- Total disapproval - 20%
Among the reasons for their answers were the following:
"Joshua and the Sons of Israel did not act well, as they could have spared the animals for themselves."
"Joshua acted properly because the people who inhabited the land were of a different religion, when Joshua killed them he wiped their religion from the earth."
"The Israeli army would have acted rightly if it acted towards the Arabs as Joshua acted towards the people of Jericho and Makeddah. I think so because if they would have left the people and the city, the Arabs would have invaded the city and fought them."
"I think they acted well, as Joshua did, because the Arabs want us to believe in their idols."
Here's the rub: these same children were presented with the Jericho story except that the names and places of the event were replaced as having been done in ancient China. When presented with the story and leaving off the Israeli connection, the results were:
- Total approval - 7%
- Partial approval or disapproval - 18%
- Total disapproval - 75%
Anyone who is suprised by these results has not lived on planet Earth for very long.
The point that Dawkins makes is that, on a broader scale, this sort of thing is happening all the time. The point that he raises is that people (and not only religious people) more often teach their children what to think rather than teaching them how to think.
I have been thinking this over for a few weeks now and while I have no conclusions to draw, I do agree that this is a big problem. For example, in December I was listening to Limbaugh and he stated (quite passionately) that Charles Darwin is responsible for the incredible number of liberals around the world. This is, obviously, patently absurd but I can easily believe that there is a large population among conservatives who agree with this. This sort of thing goes unchallenged all the time.
Another example that is a bit easier to readily identify is the whole issue of gay marriage. Conservatives oppose it. I am interested to know why. I have heard people claim that such a thing is a threat to traditional marriage. But I would argue that divorce is more of a threat to traditional marriage yet I don't hear a single peep from anyone denouncing that. How gays who want to live in a monogomous relationship are a threat to people like me who are not gay baffles me. Isn't the stated major problem with homosexuality that they are promiscuous and go around spreading aids? Wouldn't marriage alleviate that? (I know that homosexuality really bothers a lot of people but it is in fact found in the animal kingdom, particularly among bonobos, so to call it unnatural is really not very rational. It's certainly no reason to hate another human being.)
The point is that most people go about telling their children what to believe. Homosexuality is a sin. God is going to send the Atheists to Hell. You can save people from eternal damnation by preaching the Gospel. God wants you to kill the infidels. Whatever.
These things may in fact be true and right. But how do you know? Just because your parents were told by their parents who were told by their parents...?If we went by that standard, modern medicine would still be leeching people.
Where is the discussion? Where is the debate? Who on Earth is honest enough to let someone challenge their beliefs? Who is willing to amend their beliefs if they are demonstrated to be unreasonable, harmful, or what have you?
Why is it so important to people to be right?
Why don't we teach our children how to think critically? Why does it take decades of insurmountable scientific evidence before religious institutions finally accept that the Earth isn't flat, it isn't the center of the universe, and that evolution is a much liklier explanation that supports the data that we have than creationism is? Why do we use our religious beliefs to justify our disgust or hatred toward entire groups of people? What would be so terrible about thinking about what we believe?
Why is it OK to make jokes about spics, niggers, fags, or what have you but it's not OK to tell the joker that they are being offensive and hurtful?
And why, oh why, do we not have the humility to acknowledge that we simply don't know a whole lot of things? It is this humility that brings about awe and wonder as we look at the world and the universe in which we live. It is also the genesis of kindness between human beings.
The older I wax, the more I think John Lennon's dream is a worthy one, unrealistic as it may be.
