Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Din From Dinesh

I heard Dinesh D'Souza on the radio making certain arguments that are apparently in his latest book about religious beliefs.

One point he made is why would people invent an afterlife that has punishment if it's all about wish fulfillment? Well, first, no one said it's all about wish fulfillment, even if D'Souza believes that's the anti-religious line. Second, when you deal with the unknown, it's not unusual to have your fears as well as your hopes represented. Finally, and pretty obviously, punishment after death is a great way to keep people in line in this life, and get even with your enemies in the next.

Another point he made was if evolution were true, why would humans spend so much time fretting about eschatological issues, wasting energy better spent on other things? He doesn't seem to have a firm grip on the concept. First, adaptations can be suited to specifics, but they can also be of general purpose--an elephant's trunk is great for picking up peanuts people throw at it, but that wasn't why it developed. Second, humans developed big brains which allowed them to think things through and come up with solutions to diverse problems--this capacity also allows for abstract thought and self-awareness, which can lead to metaphysical speculation. Third, ultimately we can't even be sure if big brains are a useful adaptation--they've worked in the short run, but in the long run could get us killed.

Perhaps D'Souza has more to say, but if this is the level he's arguing, I'm not sure he's worth checking out.

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

The more interesting question (which Richard Dawkins actually discusses in The God Delusion) is why humans seemed hard-wired to have similar (in some respects)
religious beliefs. Its more than just a big brain that can think up neat things.

I can see why the religiously-minded might take prevalence as evidence but there is probably a good more specific evolutionary reasoning- i.e. people who religious beliefs tended to act in way which was conducive to the survival of their gene pool (maybe because it gave purpose and drive to succeed while the nonbelievers petered out due to existential angst? Belief maybe creates behavior which causes successful survival strategies.

5:46 AM, November 04, 2009  
Anonymous Denver Guy said...

I don't know if D'Souza is offered as some sort of "proof" that religious beliefs are correct. That seems a waste fo time - religious beliefs rely on faith, not proof - that is sort of their point.

On the other hand, if he is simply exploring open questions that science cannot definitively answer (allowing gaps that religion can fill for those who choose to believe they do), that's fine and usually fun. I always enjoy George Carlin's bits about trying to trip up the Priests when he was a kid, and trying to trip up atheists is fun too. Science cannot conclusively prove God does not exist or is not responsible for the universe, so these exercises better be enjoyable.

BTW, though I haven't finished the pilot of V, I like that there will be a religion's response to aliens component.

8:38 AM, November 04, 2009  
Blogger LAGuy said...

It's hard to say if belief offers an adaptational advantage or is an unnecessary offshoot of a big brain that, if anything, causes trouble.

D'Souza is making arguments for his case. It's no good to say they're not enough to "prove" something because, allegedly, what he's arguing can't be proved. His arguments are bad no matter what he's trying to do.

As to exploring open questions that science can't answer, if he were actually doing that, then I wish, in addition to his poor logic, he wouldn't constantly mangle the science along the way.

9:10 AM, November 04, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Science can also offer no proof that the Flying spaghetti Monster, Astrology of universal one-ness exist. All have an equal claim to "faith" Its not exactly an either/or when its science or religion

4:10 PM, November 04, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home

web page hit counter