\It has long been our thoughtfully considered conclusion that the innate potential of the human brain necessitates the empirical conclusion that phenomena exist beyond the scope of human knowledge. The eternal, time-worn chestnut, that for every question there is an (available) answer may be jejune or possibly, arrogant. What is the human comprehension of the eternal dynamics or source of gravity or the evaluation of one thousand light years? What is the etiology of the electrochemical energy that powers human life? To pose a question does not empirically, nor rationally result in an available or an eventual answer.
It would appear that the pragmatic existence of the eternal existence of the “unknown,” has eternally constituted the etiology of extra-rational or superstitious belief. The Sun God was thought to die after the Fall season and by certain prescribed tribal rites utilizing the “magical” trees that portended continued life (evergreens) during the dark, winter months, brought back the Sun God, i.e.,” resurrection.” Later understanding of the planetary seasons empirically, and rationally (secularly) superseded former atavistic belief. Notwithstanding the enormity of rational, scientific, and medical advances in human understanding, there understandably remain many matters yet unknown, some of which, we would maintain, are beyond the potential capability of the human consciousness or intelligence; thus, presumably, the phenomenon of “faith” viz,. non-rational belief.
However, it is irrefutably notable that cultural and ethnic diversity in zealous religious belief has led to conflict, prejudice, war, and bloody tragedy. There exists no historical shortage of war, inquisition, conflict, and human suffering evinced by the militant evangelism, historically accompanying religious zeal and prejudice.
Homo Sapiens, despite the invaluable gift of the Natural Evolution of a brain, capable of rational deliberation, historically and fearfully has required explanations for the natural phenomena of life and death, sickness, and good health, the seasons and the changing agricultural conditions, day and night, the visible planets and stars; and by atavistic necessity, metaphysically ascribed superstitious, magical and extra-rational beliefs, to assuage fear and promote good fortune
In the progression of time, “modernized” iterations of a conceptional Deity culturally evolved to fill in the blanks and provide available answers to the eternally unanswered metaphysical questions. Yet, cultural and ethnic diversity inspired historical differences in religious belief which, unfortunately, led to an eternal history of conflict, war, inquisitions, and tragedy. The Thirty Years War in Europe and the needless, tragic “Troubles” in Ireland are but two examples of tragic religious imperialism. In further, instructive illustration of human tragedy resulting from such atavistic religious zeal, one might elect to consider the conflict between the Sunni and the Shira of Islam. Since the 7th Century, these sectional groups, notably, sharing an identical Faith, have been at war over the issue of whether the prophet Mohammad is properly to be succeeded by a blood relative or, otherwise, by an election.
While it fairly may be said that the sense of “community” and identification of “believers” and the softening of the difficult recognition of our ultimate demise are positive societal concomitants of (shared) religious belief, it would appear that the unnecessary tragedy and inhumane prejudice are, inarguably, historically egregious features. Similarly undesirable is the option to prefer folk remedies for disease to modern prophylactic or curative treatment of disease.
As societally unacceptable as it may be to denigrate traditional, non-factual belief (“faith”) in favor of empirical fact, our loyalty to the human aspirations for survival and fulfillment, obliges us to prefer the available potential of enlightened reason to the ersatz methods of mythical belief. however popular and socially acceptable. It may be noted that the modest authority of this anecdotal writing is confirmed by the writings of such venerable minds as Francis Bacon, John Locke, Rene Descartes, Benjamin Franklin, Emmanuel Kant,, Jeremy Bentham, and a venerable plethora of humanistic, empirical thinkers..
One might beneficially consider rationally substituting the goal of personal redemption and ultimate reward, for that of societal improvement and universal equality.
-p.
plinyblogdotcom 