The final last ditch defense of the religious apologist, when all else fails, is often the functionalist argument, that a useful lie or myth is needed to hold society together and make it civilized.
There are of course, to my mind, and probably your too, lots of things wrong with that, not least that if you need a myth or lie, then there are certainly better ones than religion. Even if you don't see a distinction between religious lies and honest but unsupported belief. ( The difference being that honest beliefs do not pretend to be supported by faked evidence. ) And that, the useful lie idea, is generally the view of the snob and narcissist who sees the rest of society as a threat to themselves, to be opposed, rather than a community to be assisted.
But perhaps the biggest problem with the useful lie idea, and is I think is worth considering. Is that simply. You have to get people to believe it. To do which you have to create an environment, in which, lies and myths can thrive, flourish and survive. Which means you have to suppress education, debate, science, healthy sceptical thinking, and well founded contradictory knowledge at the very least, as well as normalizing and making respectable half truth. And when you do that, you create thereby, a cultural environment, which not only favours your lie or myth, however good and harmless that may be, but all other possible lies and myths as well. So that a society which is set up to believe that, for example, the “golden rule” is a gift directly from god, which may not seem so dangerous an idea in itself. Is also a society where the defenses against, racial superiority, fascism, ultra-nationalism, conspiracy theories and a hundred and one other stupidities all the way down to Q-Anon, are lowered, and where there probably exist a ready made infrastructure for the promotion of falsehood, whether that be a corrupted news media, a million pulpits or perhaps both and more.
The world will always be somewhat favourable to lies, there is no prefect world, but you simply can not create a world which where you deliberately set out to promote so called, good lies, without making it a world which is also much more friendly to the bad ones as well.
14
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
5 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Well how about rather than a "useful lie" we were to use "useful reality" by using the scientific knowledge we have so far about our cosmos and what supports our existence? Then if people create stories, myths, art, symbols, ceremonies, rituals, philosophy of life, and so on based within our reality, that would be better than basing our reality on the myth? Maybe that switch could be helpful to humanity?
This is a question I wrestle with -- for example to do away with the "lie" that we were created by a supernatural god, etc. and replace it with the reality that we evolved after thousands of years and are continuing to evolve even still, so we need to take control of our future ourselves, rather than look to an outside source to do that for us.
We like stories and ways to look at things differently, and we also like to learn about nature and ponder the ways things are interconnected, so we can form our thoughts about what's right and wrong, positive and negative, or at least understand the balance or learn things we didn't know and go forward with new knowledge. BUT those stories need to fit into our current belief about the earth and the cosmos. I believe we have already started with that -- but it clashes with the old set of myths which keep some people from seeing reality for what it is.
Julie808
Level 8
May 31, 2022
1
Yes it is like the old nonsense apologist arguments. " Atheists believe in nothing." And "You can not derive morality logically just from facts, you need religion for morality." But both those make the fundamental mistake of confusing belief with religion. Atheist have to believe some things, we all do, like I have to believe that my eyes do not lie to me, when I am out riding my bike and I see a truck coming towards me. Atheism is not about having no beliefs, just about replacing bad and outdated beliefs with better ones, specifically, or mainly to a degree, just theist beliefs, like the name says.
And you do need a belief, or a prerequisite as a basis for morality, but that can be something very simple, like: the golden rule, I think that I would prefer to live in a happier world, it is best to frame society for those living at the bottom since an accident could place anyone there, or appreciation is the true source of happiness, etc. and it is much better to start with a simple one, than to start with one that brings a lot of hampering and often morally questionable extra baggage with it, as traditional religions do.
The most frustrating thing is encountering people who appear "normal"; then they ask, are you religious. It goes downhill from there.
Same thing applies to republicans. Some dems are just as bad but they never backed trump and rely on facts much more than the republicans I know.
Then there is the case where they are just born susceptible to believing the lie. They have a busted bullshit meter and no amount of talking to them is going to change or educate them.
silverotter11
Level 9
May 31, 2022
2
The issue that I see with the "useful lie" idea is that it first requires the elimination from society all those individuals who engage in the habit critical thought. Then, and only then, would any such "useful lie" be universally accepted.
anglophone
Level 9
May 31, 2022
1
If I recall it right, in PLato's version of the useful lie (the"noble lie" ) only the uncritical would be manipulated by it while the thinkers would see that it's a myth needed to maintain the ideal social structure. Or something like that.
@Wallace Yes but the danger of that is that you risk normalizing half truth as an acceptable social and thinking tradition, which may become overlooked even by thinkers, because it is so taken for granted. And which, this being the main point of my post, sets a lower standard of critical thinking, through all of the society.
And the uneducated is the easiest to manipulate.
GrooshStar
Level 7
May 31, 2022
5
As is well demonstrated by the dumbing down of America by the GOP.
@anglophone How many American GOP members do you know? While I am sure there are many dumb GOP members, I am sure (in fact know) many who are very intelligent.
Ever hear of Thomas Sowell? Perhaps not you might have been too busy playing with yourself.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.