Mick Hartley

Not All Religions Are Equal

Written by

Mick Hartley

in

argued in The Incoherence of the Philosophers against the very idea of laws of nature, on the ground that any such laws would put God’s hands in chains. According to al-Ghazzali, a piece of cotton placed in a flame does not darken and smoulder because of the heat, but because God wants it to darken and smoulder. After al-Ghazzali, there was no more science worth mentioning in Islamic countries.

The consequences are hideous. Whatever one thinks of the Muslims who blow themselves up in crowded cities in Europe or Israel or fly planes into buildings in the US, who could dispute that the certainty of their faith had something to do with it? George W. Bush and many others would have us believe that terrorism is a distortion of Islam, and that Islam is a religion of peace. Of course, it is good policy to say this, but statements about what “Islam is” make little sense. Islam, like all other religions, was created by people, and there are potentially as many different versions of Islam as there are people who profess to be Muslims. (The same remarks apply to Eagleton’s highly personal account of what Christianity “is”.) I don’t know on what ground one can say that a peaceable well-intentioned person like Abdus Salam was any more a true Muslim than the murderous holy warriors of Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, the clerics throughout the world of Islam who incite hatred and violence, and those Muslims who demonstrate against supposed insults to their faith, but not against the atrocities committed in its name. (Incidentally, Abdus Salam regarded himself as a devout Muslim, but he belonged to a sect that most Muslims consider heretical, and for years was not allowed to return to Pakistan.) Dawkins treats Islam as just another deplorable religion, but there is a difference. The difference lies in the extent to which religious certitude lingers in the Islamic world, and in the harm it does. Richard Dawkins’s even-handedness is well-intentioned, but it is misplaced. I share his lack of respect for all religions, but in our times it is folly to disrespect them all equally.

Comments

  1. dearieme Avatar
    dearieme

    “in the ninth century, when science barely existed in Europe, the greatest centre of scientific research in the world was the House of Wisdom in Baghdad”: so people keep saying, but did it have much to do with Islam? Was it just a survivor of Greek, or Persian, habits?

    Reply
  2. Dom Avatar
    Dom

    The Christian response to science in America is a little more complex than most people think. The common belief is that right-wing Christianity is a back-water corner of the country that tries to thwart scientific studies. The usual examples are Evolution Theory and stem-cell research, but the first is still taught in schools (backed up by courts) and the second is not so much thwarted as regulated, and very recent advances may make that regulation unnecessary.
    But look at other examples. Head injury research is almost halted because of PETA, and nuclear energy is regulated to a standstill because of environmental groups.
    It’s easy to think of other examples. The use of DDT in the third world, the study of gender differences … There are many groups that oppose some sort of scientific research. The one group we worry most about, politicized Christianity, is — as Weinberg points out — just about the weakest at the moment.

    Reply
  3. IanCroydon Avatar
    IanCroydon

    Dawkins suffers from the same self-loathing all left liberals have. But in Dawkins’ case it is more extreme because, as a virulent anti-religionist, he cannot accept that his own brand of liberalist humanism is straight out of the modern post-enlightenment Christian ethos.
    Most modern Christians are essentially liberal thinkers, the most successful liberal socialist political movements in Europe have come from pro-Christian groups, and the basic tenets of liberalism are nominally the same as modern european deist Christian ones.
    Dawkins’ for all his blather of standing up to Christian hardliners, is essentially a spineless coward. He fits the typical yellow striped jacket in continuing to attack the easy target of western democratic religion knowning that someone wont come round and chop his head off as a result.
    How lucky for Dawkins that his criticisms are against those who preach peace and the santity of life, and adhere to the common agreement of allowing each of us free will to choose his path in life, I’d love to see him try his anti-God rhetoric down Finsbury Mosque and come out with his head still attached.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts

Powered by