Okay, I admit I am being sensationalist with this sweeping question as the title of this post. What I intend to do is to question the necessity of religion in the social sphere of life and in all the realms of philosophy. Coincidentally, some specialists in related fields have recently published books on the necessity of religion and the concept of God.
The researchers and authors mentioned in the article above explore this question from their own specialist viewpoints, and veer towards atheism as a logical and ‘proper’ choice for mankind, especially these days when the basis of religion as a guardian of morality is shaky.
I have no specialist opinion to offer. I am only seeing the world around me, a world in which religious fervour is only increasing, manifesting itself in extravagant celebrations, intractable disputes, and global terrorism. I do not want to reject religion or the concept of God, but to explore the ‘proper’ role for these in our collective sphere.
From a practical standpoint, it is really appalling that an extraordinary quantity of resources – money, time, energy, human life – are being spent on religion-related matters today. In our country, they mainly take the form of expensive celebrations for miscellaneous Gods, bouts of collective hysteria (like the Ganesh-drinking-milk episode), visitations to famous, but overcrowded temples, riots fomented on religious lines by politicians, and security bandobasts for white-elephant shrines. The world over, religion has become a divisive force, and practically speaking, I think the debate over whether any religion really promotes violence is useless. The reality on the ground is that people are provoked to violence, often suicidal, in the name of religion and religious differences between people. With the world population rising the most in all the poorest places, economic inequality rising, and discontent over standards of living increasing, religion is the last thing the world needs to spend their resources on.
From a philosophical standpoint, religious thinking has either replaced or killed philosophical thought in all of its major branches. Logic ceases to exist where faith in the unknown takes over, and as the article linked above states, most people who are otherwise quite rational in their everyday life, attribute everything inexplicable and less understood to God.
Similarly, while science deals with the empirically verifiable phenomena of the universe, religion has firm hold over metaphysics. Most religions have great metaphysical components, ranging from the simplistic (prospect of virgins in heaven or the fires of hell) to the elaborate and the complex (Upanishadic thought). The beauty is, the positivist method of Karl Popper that defines the characteristics of a scientific theory, stops science from being a know-all, from being confident of having conquered all frontiers of knowledge about the universe we live in. Hence, religion will continue to mock science for its lack of confidence and its methods.
Aesthetics is deluged with immense quantities of artistic expression dedicated to religion, which continues to inspire art. Often, this is everyday art, like the idols of Durga and Ganesh on their respective festivals, or the taaziyaa-s of Moharram, or the trinkets sold outside temples, not the high art of, say, the Sistine Chapel frescoes or the expensive one of, say, the Swaminarayan sect temples.
Religion influences politics, becoming a divisive force in vote-bank democracy, or an exclusivist one in radical theocracy. Notably, the forces of Marxism and communism, which sought to create a more egalitarian society, preferred to dispense with religion in their societies.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, religion or faith is widely considered to be the foundation of morality and ethics. The belief in, and very often, fear of, God is considered to inspire good behaviour, and the judgement of good versus bad.
My personal opinion on the role of religion is as follows: in terms of philosophy, I would like religion not to obstruct logic & rational thinking, and to use metaphysics as a kind of inspiration to the wider humanity, raising questions about the universe and reality that are truly thought-provoking and that inspire people to strive to answer them rationally. Religion is best kept out of politics altogether. One more identity and one more divisive force are just not needed in an age of irresponsible and morally corrupt politicians. If religion inspires ethical behaviour, I would condone it, if not encourage it. Ethics in human interactions is required above all today, when those interactions themselves have increased in number and extent. So I am not too concerned about the means by which ethical behaviour can be secured (except for the use of force, of course). Finally, religion is best restricted to being a personal, private faith, and kept out of social interactions. In our religion-obsessed country, it may almost be blasphemy, but I advocate private prayer to religious congregations. In this respect, the Hindu concept of a private deity (iishTa devataa) is most appropriate. If religion is thus restricted to being something private, its aesthetic expression will also stop being one more cause of divisiveness (a la M. F. Husain’s paintings).
Spirituality is necessary today, far more than religion. And faith in the fellow human is far, far more essential (and equally hard to achieve) than faith in God.
. Combined with the fact that less and less people come up to the net these days, men’s tennis is at a duller stage, at least for me, than it has been at any other time in my life (two and a half decades).