Religion is simply belief without reason…
Your definition of “religion” has little to do with reality.
“Religion” comes from the Latin word,
religare, which means “to regulate.” That’s what a religion does, it regulates one’s intellect and will, one’s way of behaving and believing. You voluntarily choose a religion. When one says they “believe” in a religious sense, what they are saying is that they freely accept and submit to their religion.
Positivism is just as much a “religious” belief as any other.
All
beliefs–philosophical, scientific, theological, political, legal, economic, or otherwise–are based upon three kinds of evidence:
- experience (which include passions, emotions),
- reason, and
- testimony of others.
Since each and every person has varying ability to reason, they experience different things, and have been exposed to varying testimonies, it should be no surprise that there are so many different beliefs in the world. Whether or not those beliefs are true is another thing, however. Some are quite unreasonable. Many are rather contrary to experience, and many conflict with trustworthy testimony.
One must choose for themselves who and how to worship based upon: 1) reason, 2) experience, and 3) the testimony of others.
Sociologist Peter Berger wrote a book called, *The Heretical Imperative. *In it Berger uses the word “heresy” to mean “to choose for one’s self.” The irony pointed to by Berger is that even when one chooses orthodox values, he or she has to exercised “heresy” because in the process of intentionally choosing any set of values, even the traditional ones, alternatives must be considered. In his book, Berger addresses the modern situation with its multitudes of religions, philosophies and paradigms, declaring that we each live with “a heretical imperative.”
Harvard professor R.B. Perry wrote that the root of religion is, “
the attempt of man, conscious of his helplessness, to unite himself with the powers which do actually dominate." He further affirms, "True religion is better than false, but it is not less certain that religion is better than irreligion.”
Religion. An Introduction - Lectures on the Harvard Classics (1909-1914)]. If this is true, then everyone who recognizes that he is not the power which dominates, has a choice to make. How will you regulate your life? Religion is better than irreligion (ie. a non-regulated life).
Faith is assent to that which is “unseen.” But it isn’t “blind” if it relies upon experience, reason and trustworthy testimony as valid forms of evidence, just like all other fields of study.
Every field of study includes trust/belief (ie. “faith”) in things unseen or not fully understood. I studied engineering in college. When in college, I never actually saw the wave-like characteristics of light with my own eyes. I trusted that the brilliant fathers of science who testified to the wave-like characteristics were trustworthy. In my undergraduate studies, I can’t say that I ever fully “understood”
Schrodinger’s Equation, but in order to move on in science, I couldn’t stop to verify every testimony given to me by the use of my own eyes. I needed to trust Schrodinger and many others, then perhaps later I might better understand. Faith precedes understanding, even in engineering studies.
Even science draws upon and considers authoritative much evidence which is “unseen” or merely “theoretical.” The study of math, science, philosophy, and theology and other fields of study
ALL rely upon varying degrees of certainty which are less than absolute in order to progress. Individuals must also progress, grow, mature without having absolute certainty.
There are indeed some things about reality that are “incomprehensible” to human nature. However, that does not imply that *all *things cannot be knowable to sufficient degree to grow, to mature,
to believe. The conclusions of our daily existence can and must be an assent based upon the preponderance of evidence. If we discover new evidence which is contradictory, we simply draw different conclusions. That’s how life works.
We can and must draw conclusions based upon the preponderance of evidence, even though human reasoning can be flawed, or our experience limited, or some of the testimony before us is false. To do otherwise would be detrimental to maturity, growth, and living one’s full potential.
Think about it…I dont understand the plan…so there’s no God. Isnt one of the definitions of God that he is infinitely smarter than us? Does a dog ever realize why we sent him outside to poop? You see suffering and think…I’ve got better plan. Doesnt a dog think he has a better plan than us too? Havnt we seen Man’s grand plan enough to know we dont have clue?
