{"id":9092,"date":"2013-01-03T13:07:55","date_gmt":"2013-01-03T13:07:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2013\/01\/03\/mature-religion-is-open-ended-too-more-quest-than-conclusions\/"},"modified":"2013-01-03T13:07:55","modified_gmt":"2013-01-03T13:07:55","slug":"mature-religion-is-open-ended-too-more-quest-than-conclusions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2013\/01\/03\/mature-religion-is-open-ended-too-more-quest-than-conclusions\/","title":{"rendered":"Mature Religion is Open-Ended Too: More Quest Than Conclusions"},"content":{"rendered":"

The following is from an interview<\/a> with A. C. Grayling who is speaking of the open mind and open inquiry:<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s a mindset, he reveals, that \u201cloves the open-endedness and the continuing character of the conversation that humankind has with itself about all these things that really matter.\u201d
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s also a way of thinking that marks a line in the sand between religion and science. The temptation to fall for the former\u2014hook, line, and sinker\u2014is plain to see: \u201cPeople like narratives, they like to have an explanation, they like to know where they are going.\u201d Weaving another string of thought into his tapestry of human psychology, Grayling laments that his fellow human beings \u201cdon\u2019t want to have to think these things out for themselves. They like the nice, pre-packaged answer that\u2019s just handed to them by somebody authoritative with a big beard.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

A. C. Grayling, like many if not most militant atheists, sees the difference between religion and science in the difference between pre-packaged dogmas thoughtlessly and uncritically accepted from some authority and open-ended free inquiry.<\/span><\/p>\n

That is not the way I see it.  For me, mature religion is more quest than conclusions.  It too is open-ended and ongoing, subject to revision and correction. It benefits from abrasion with such competing sectors of culture as philosophy and science.  By abrasion the pearl is formed.<\/span><\/p>\n

All genuine religion involves a quest since God must remain largely unknown, and this by his very nature. He must remain latens Deitas<\/em> in Aquinas' phrase:<\/p>\n

Adoro te devote, latens Deitas, Qu\u00e6 sub his figuris vere latitas;
Tibi se cor meum totum subjicit, Quia te contemplans totum deficit.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Godhead here in hiding, whom I do adore, Masked by these bare shadows, shape and nothing more, See, Lord, at Thy service low lies here a heart Lost, all lost in wonder at the God thou art.<\/span><\/p>\n

(tr. Gerard Manley Hopkins, <\/span>here<\/span><\/a>.)<\/span>
  <\/span><\/p>\n

But as religion becomes established in the world in the form of churches, sects, and denominations with worldly interests, it becomes less  of a quest and more of a worldly hustle. Dogmatics displaces inquiry, and fund-raising faith. The once alive becomes ossified.  All human institutions are corruptible, and are eventually corrupted.<\/p>\n

Mature religion must be more quest than conclusions. It is vastly more a seeking than a finding. More a cleansing of windows and a polishing  of mirrors than a glimpsing. And certainly more a glimpsing than a comfortable resting upon dogmas. When philosophy and religion and mysticism and science are viewed as quests they complement one another. And this despite the tensions among Athens, Jerusalem, Benares, and Alexandria.<\/span><\/p>\n

The critic of religion wants to pin it down, reducing it to dogmatic contents, so as to attack it where it is weakest. Paradoxically, the atheist 'knows' more about God than the sophisticated theist — he knows so much that he knows no such thing could exist. He 'knows' the divine nature and knows that it is incompatible with the existence of evil — to mention one line of attack.  What he 'knows,' of course, is only the concept he himself has fabricated and projected.  Aquinas, by contrast, held that the existence of God is far better known than God's nature — which remains shrouded in a cloud of unknowing.<\/p>\n

The (immature) religionist also wants religion pinned down and dogmatically spelled out for purposes of self-definition, doxastic security, other-exclusion, worldly promotion, and political leverage. This is a reason why reformers like Jesus are met with a cold shoulder — or worse.<\/span><\/p>\n

How is it that someone as intelligent as Grayling could have such a cartoonish understanding of religion?  The answer is that he and his brethren  utterly lack the religious sensibility.  They lack it in the same way many scientists lack the philosophical sensibility, many prosaic folk the poetic sensibility, and so on.<\/span><\/p>\n

This is why debates with militant atheists are a waste of time.  To get a taste of the febrile militancy of Grayling's atheism, see here<\/a>.<\/span> <\/span><\/p>\n

\nRelated articles<\/legend>\n
\n
\"\"<\/a>Hitchens: No Understanding of Religion<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Trotsky's Faith<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Atheist Blogger Swims the Tiber<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Atheist A.C. Grayling is a meretricious thinker, but a marvelous comedian<\/a><\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>Why bad science is like bad religion<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/fieldset>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The following is from an interview with A. C. Grayling who is speaking of the open mind and open inquiry: It\u2019s a mindset, he reveals, that \u201cloves the open-endedness and the continuing character of the conversation that humankind has with itself about all these things that really matter.\u201d It\u2019s also a way of thinking that … Continue reading “Mature Religion is Open-Ended Too: More Quest Than Conclusions”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[191,399,331,372,503,143,139],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9092","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-atheism-and-theism","category-athens-and-benares","category-athens-and-jerusalem","category-belief","category-credo","category-god","category-religion"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9092","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9092"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9092\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9092"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9092"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9092"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}