Darwin as the New Mythology Essay Example for Free

Darwin as the New Mythology Essay It has been a major struggle for the scientific community to understand the persistence of religious belief. After centuries of writing by rationalist thinkers, it remains a mystery why so many continue to believe in the old gods. The survival of religion has been though revolution, political and economic change and every conceivable alteration of consciousness throughout the ages. â€Å"Common sense† would then say that religion, in some very real sense, is true, is righteous and factual if it has survived so many changes. Buckert, however, holds that the only way to explain this persistence, short of admitting there is much truth behind it, is that it assists humanity in adapting to changing environments: in short, making religion part of the Darwinian universe. This review will revolve around the methods used by the author in deriving his conclusion, really on the basis that his treatments of the specific cases are so lacking in detail as to be purely superficial. Hence, the real meat of the book lies in methodology, the â€Å"suggestion† of alternate ways of looking at religion. Buckert begins by making the claim that nearly all researchers on religion hold: that there are undeniable similarities among all religions, regardless of their background or geographical origin (4-6). There is the ubiquity of prayer and sacrifice, the saturation of symbol and other forms of communication within groups, and ultimately, the creation and maintenance of group solidarity, itself an important ingredient in winning the struggle for survival (13). Ultimately, the book makes a single argument: religion makes sense because it assists in the struggle for survival. Even institutions such as self sacrifice and the rejection of competition among certain religions are in fact adaptive behaviors that maintain the solidarity necessary to function in a hostile world. There is no specific reason who religion and religious ideas specifically are necessary for this, nor does this explain the persistence of belief, though it may offer a suggestion as to its ancient origin–which are two different arguments. One interesting (and irritating) feature of this book is that there is no real â€Å"argument† given in the standard sense, rather than a series of suggestions loosely held together by what might be called â€Å"popular Darwinism. † This singular suggestion, that religion â€Å"works† for maintaining solidarity is certainly nothing new, and offers such a superficial view of disparate religions that it remains merely a suggestion, a means of planting doubts among readers who are followers of a certain religious system. Religions such as Christianity or Islam are described in one or two sentence snippets, clearly â€Å"sacrificing† detail for the sake of a smoothly running argument, the ultimate drawback of this work. Giving this thesis in more detail, the author brings this thesis to bear on such objects as guilt, hierarchy, meaning and gift giving–all of these exist in the realm of biology and the world of problem solving within the context of group solidarity, itself a biological mechanism. Again, all of these are described in a few lines, providing a superficial context for the generalizations upon which the book is based. Guilt, for example (cf 103-105), is the beginning of problem solving. Natural disasters, disease, etc. are inevitably met by questions such as â€Å"why us? † Hence, guilt fixes blame so that the group can then go about the business of reinforcing its solidarity to fix the problem. Uses of guilt and shame are constant to punish deviants and maintain solidarity, not to mention reinforcing the world of hierarchy and authority relations. â€Å"Meaning† is offered, on the most general level possible, as finding a purpose in a universe of â€Å"infinite complexity† (26). Of course, Darwin himself could also serve these ends. â€Å"Sacrifice† is treated in an interesting, yet radically general way, as the utilitarian doctrine as sacrificing the part for the whole. In other words, the author uses the example of an animal chewing off its own foot to get out of a trap. Human sacrifice is something like that. This is the basic structure of the book and the method of generalization. â€Å"Generalization† here is deliberately called a method because the argument only works (or at least works smoothly) when it functions at a high level of generality. A specialized study of religious systems will bring out so many deviations from this general scheme as to render it useless. Hence, it must remain at a superficial level. What is the most significant element of the book, however, is the methodology itself. The best way to understand the flow and structure of this work is to grasp the methodological assumptions that are inherent in it. None of these assumptions are argued for, and it is assumed that readers will agree a priori. a. Objects in the natural world create the consciousness not just of peoples, but of communities. Consciousness is not considered an autonomous object and free will is rejected implicitly, consciousness is created by the existence of objects in space and time, and hence, is controlled by them. b. Putting this differently, Buckert assumes that consciousness is a material object, itself part and parcel of the world of cause and effect. This is tantamount to holding that the religious objects of worship or fetish are not actually real, but are artifacts, in fact, residual categories, of the enslavement of consciousness to the world of matter and competition. Even more, that all religions are like this and have the same root, regardless of the background, geography or time period in which they develop. c. The beliefs and methods of the modern scientific mind and their conclusions are assumed to be true, and hence, any treatment of religion (or any social phenomenon whatever) must conform to their demands. In other words, instead of couching his phrases in terms of religion according to â€Å"natural selection,† Buckert phrases his approach in terms of â€Å"facts† and â€Å"truth† about the world of material bodies and cause and effect, within which consciousness develops and takes its course. Needless to say, this approach undercuts his own claim to objectivity and scientific rationalism. d. Another major methodological assumption here is that all thought patterns, or patterns of consciousness require a cause, and this cause is provided by group solidarity and the struggle for survival. Putting this differently, each pattern of consciousness, that is, any systematized belief system must have its roots in evolutionary biology to be made sense of. This is to say that any thought pattern that can be traced throughout time in some superficially similar pattern must have a cause with roots in biology. Of course, this means that group solidarity is itself a biological function and hence, all forms of thought that reinforce such solidarity. e. A striking claim made implicitly throughout the book (and made the bedrock of the argument) is that religious claims are ultimately false. Better, not so much false or true but beyond such evaluations because the purpose is survival and competition, rather than claims of truth or falsity. Of course, religious devotees regularly make truth claims, and many of these claims are directly detrimental to their survival or flourishing. The answer to these claims can be found in the â€Å"Escape and Offerings† chapter (chapter two), where the author holds that when one can see sacrifice as beneficial (cutting off an arm that could infect the whole body, for example), the personal sacrifices of martyrs, etc, can be explained (34-38). This is the â€Å"fallacy of equivocation,† since one is using the word â€Å"sacrifice† in two very different senses and contexts. One might see the utility in sacrificing one to save the whole, but this has nothing to do with explaining the desire for martyrdom or the sacrifice of millions in persecutions of religion. â€Å"Sacrifice† is here used in two different senses. f. States of consciousness such as guilt or reciprocation make no sense unless placed in a Darwinian context. This is merely the thesis restated. But implicitly, this argues that states such as guilt are residual categories of the evolutionary process, and hence, are not real, they are epi-phenomena at best. The argument comes down to justifying one’s own feelings of guilt by claiming that these guilt feelings assist in the development of group solidarity, and hence, it is acceptable that I feel them. Again, this is equivocation, making the jump from the collective to the individual within the same argument. In fact, equivocation is just as much central to Buckert as anything else, since the entire structure of the book is a regular back and forth between the animal world and the development of human religion. Hence if it can be justified in the animal kingdom, it is justified in human society, and if in human society, then the individual. g. Finally, Buckert fails to see the self-referential argument involved. If thought processes are part of the biological process and creative of social solidarity (or are derivative from it), then the Darwinian consensus of the modern scientific establishment also then falls into this category. Such a consensus assists biology in developing its rhetorical weapons, its receipt of grant money and its social prestige. How are these not nearly identical to the present argument concerning religion? In conclusion, the Buckert book here under review is a series of logical equivocations and false parallelisms. Ultimately, the book might have worked if the field of ancient religion had been its specific base (and it the author’s field, after all), rather than seeking to answer the question of the persistence of religion over time. Religion in its primitive, polytheistic sense might fit Buckert’s thesis. However, the existence of a sophisticated Christianity in the High Middle Ages, on the other hand, does not so fit. Developed, literate religions such as Islam have created as many barriers to group solidarity as catalysts, and hence, the argument breaks down. One might conclude that since modern societies have developed new means of reinforcing group solidarity, this method of explanation then fails (a priori) to explain why billions still believe.

The Civil War Essays -- essays research papers

American History, The Civil War After the Constitution was adopted by all of the States in 1789, uniting the States into one nation, differences between the States had been worked out through compromises. By 1861 these differences between the Northern States and the Southern States had become so great that compromise would no longer work. Thus, a conflict started within our nation that was called the Civil War. For more than 30 years arguments between the North and South had been growing. One of these quarrels was about taxes paid on goods brought into this country from foreign countries. This kind of tax is called a tariff. In 1828 Northern businessmen helped get the "Tariff Act" passed. It raised the prices of manufactured products from Europe which were sold mainly in the South. The purpose of the law was to encourage the South to buy the North's products. It angered the Southern people to have to pay more for the goods they wanted from Europe or pay more to get goods from the North. Either way the Southern people were forced to pay more because of the efforts of Northern businessmen. Though most of tariff laws had been changed by the time of the Civil War, the Southern people still remembered how they were treated by the Northern people. In the years before the Civil War the political power in the Federal Government, centered in Washington D.C., was changing. The Northern and Mid-Western States were becoming more and more powerful as the populations increased. The Southern States were losing political power. Just as the original thirteen colonies fought for their independence almost 100 years earlier, the Southern States felt a growing need for freedom from the central Federal authority in Washington D.C. They felt that each State should make its own laws. This issue was called "State's Rights". Some Southern States wanted to secede, or break away from the United States of America and govern themselves. Another quarrel between the North and South, and perhaps the most emotional one, was over the issue of slavery. Farming was the South's main industry and cotton was the primary farm product. Not having the use of machines, it took a great amount of human labor to pick cotton. A large number of slaves were used in the South to provide the labor. Many slaves were also used to provide labor for the various household chores that needed ... ...lying raw materials for the industrialization of the more prosperous North. The reenactment of the fall of Richmond seemed to symbolize the cooling of Confederate passion. The ceremony drew 850 people, while one mile away, 1,500 jammed Broad Street t for a walk to benefit the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. On the lawn of the Capitol, belles wore black as a fifeanddrum corps led the Northern charge, startling couples eating brunch on downtown patios. Another neglected chapter unfolds along Lee's Retreat, a 20stop driving tour promoted by the National Park Service and economic development agencies. Reflectorized signs featuring red, white and blue bugles point the way across the lush, increasingly hilly terrain from Petersburg to Appomattox Court House, where the surrender took place. After the Constitution was adopted by all of the States in 1789, uniting the States into one nation, differences between the States had been worked out through compromises. By 1861 compromises had been practically thrown out the window because no one would listen to the other. Thus, a conflict started within our nation that was called the Civil War.

Republic of India

India, officially the Republic of India (Bharat Ganrajya), is a country in South Asia. It is the seventh-largest country by area, the second-most populous country with over 1. 2 billion people, and the most populous democracy in the world. Bounded by the Indian Ocean on the south, the Arabian Sea on the south-west, and the Bay of Bengal on the south-east, it shares land borders with Pakistan to the west;[d] China, Nepal, and Bhutan to the north-east; and Burma and Bangladesh to the east.In the Indian Ocean, India is in the vicinity of Sri Lanka and the Maldives; in addition, India's Andaman and Nicobar Islands share a maritime border with Thailand and Indonesia. Home to the ancient Indus Valley Civilisation and a region of historic trade routes and vast empires, the Indian subcontinent was identified with its commercial and cultural wealth for much of its long history.Four world religions—Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism—originated here, whereas Judaism, Zoroast rianism, Christianity, and Islam arrived in the 1st millennium CE and also helped shape the region's diverse culture. Gradually annexed by and brought under the administration of the British East India Company from the early 18th century and administered directly by the United Kingdom from the mid-19th century, India became an independent nation in 1947 after a struggle for independence that was marked by non-violent resistance led by Mahatma Gandhi.Rabindranath Tagore is Asia's first Nobel laureate and composer of India's national anthem Swami Vivekananda was a key figure in introducing Vedanta and Yoga in Europe and USA, raising interfaith awareness and making Hinduism a world religion. The Indian economy is the world's tenth-largest by nominal GDP and third-largest by purchasing power parity (PPP). Following market-based economic reforms in 1991, India became one of the fastest-growing major economies; it is considered a newly industrialised country.However, it continues to face the challenges of poverty, corruption, malnutrition, inadequate public healthcare, and terrorism. A nuclear weapons state and a regional power, it has the third-largest standing army in the world and ranks eighth in military expenditure among nations. India is a federal constitutional republic governed under a parliamentary system consisting of 28 states and 7 union territories. India is a pluralistic, multilingual, and a multi-ethnic society. It is also home to a diversity of wildlife in a variety of protected habitats.

The Antagonistic View of Sexuality in OConnor Wise Blood...

The Antagonistic View of Sexuality in Wiseblood In the novel Wiseblood, by Flannery OConnor, one finds an unpleasant, almost antagonistic view of sexuality. The author seems to regard sex as an evil, and harps on this theme throughout the novel. Each sexual incident which occurs in the novel is tainted with grotesquem. Different levels of the darker side of sexuality are exposed, from perversion to flagrant displays of nudity. It serves to give the novel a bit of a moralistic overtone. The Carnival Episode illustrated Hazels first experience with sexuality. The author depicts an incident surrounded by an aura of sinfulness. Indeed, the shows promoter claims that it is SINsational. In his anxiousness to view the†¦show more content†¦He feels ashamed for having gone inside the tent, and punishes himself. Here, it is evident that the author means to show that Sexuality is a sinful creature. This moral tone is reinforced by the behavior of his parents during the episode. Whilst inside the tent, Hazel hears his father remark appreciatively about the nude body: Had one of themther built into ever casket, be a heap ready to go sooner. After returning home, Hazels mother realizes that her son has experienced something that he should not have, and confronts him about it. Though he does not admit what he has done, he proceeds to punish himself. It is inferred that Hazel respects his mothers attitude toward the matter. OConnor seems to propose that Hazel must do penance for what he has done, or, on a larger scale, for witnessing vulgar displays of sexuality. Perversion reaches its height when OConnor introduces the reader to Enoch Emery. During Enochs various dealings with women, one witnesses vulgarity in all its forms. The events surrounding the first of these incidents is tinged with a bit of mystery. OConnor paints the portrait of a Peeping Tom, an adolescent Enoch Emery watching a topless woman sunbathe while hidden in between abelia bushes. Strangely enough, the woman has a long and cadaverous face, with a bandage-like bathing cap. Ironically, the woman also has pointedShow MoreRelatedOrganisational Theory230255 Words   |  922 Pagesand provides an advanced introduction to the heterogeneous study of organizations, including chapters on phenomenology, critical theory and psychoanalysis. Like all good textbooks, the book is accessible, well researched and readers are encouraged to view chapters as a starting point for getting to grips with the field of organization theory. Dr Martin Brigham, Lancaster University, UK McAule y et al. provide a highly readable account of ideas, perspectives and practices of organization. By thoroughly