Bridging gaps

This blog is meant to reflect on how the world might move towards peace. However, a certain understanding needs to be reached to bridge the gap between followers of different faiths.

The classical, divinely inspired monotheistic faiths converge at source in that they emanate from one transcendental  Creator who reaches out to individuals, cultures and institutions at various times in human history and guides us forward spiritually and practically and confers meaning on our existence. This view, I maintain,  resides deep within the soul of the most holy, non-worldly people in all religions, the truly devout inner sanctum. My own faith in Christ as the source of  agape love and eternal life is strengthened by this recognition of God's omnipotence and omnipresence.

But there is one faith which does not converge at source with the others, because it has no divine wellspring: atheism. Here is a quote from River out of Eden by Richard Dawkins (1995), p.133

The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if, at bottom, there is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference ...DNA neither knows nor cares. DNA just is. And we dance to its music. [My italics.]

If what he says is true, no creature would be created able to form concepts of evil, goodness or pity. Maybe Dr D’s views have evolved in the intervening period. In his defence I can’t really believe that he would continue to have such a self contradictory model of reality. I know my own views have changed (hopefully for the better) over the decades and not all atheists subscribe to the above.

In the interests of progress towards mutual understanding – a necessary precondition for peace in the material world - could one of my atheist or humanist brothers enlighten me, as a Christian, on the current world view of the atheist/humanist belief system, or at least of their own particular denomination within it? 

There is no denying the conflict which exists between followers of different religions, even if one leaves atheism out of it. It is hardly surprising since churches, mosques and temples are filled with human beings of varying degrees of spiritual enlightenment. However, I would argue that the religions all spring from a reality which cannot be ignored without dire consequences for us all, that human beings are intrinsically spiritual.  If we try to delete religion from the human experience we cut ourselves off from the elevating truths of a greater reality and drift into the clutches of whatever demagogue (Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung in modern times, collectively responsible for some 100 million deaths) tries to fill the spiritual vacuum, particularly in times of crisis.

However, God is merciful and, I believe, wants us to do the best we can with the world he has given us and recognises that many have become blinded to God's existence by excessive reductionism,  pride in human progress and judgement from within  man-made moral matrices.

Atheists believe there is no Creator; but they do, like the believer, want to rid the world of war. I am hoping this blog will be one focal point by which these two broad camps can understand and respect each other, and so work together to make war and violent conflict no more than a bad memory.

Comments on past posts have come from friends and contacts directly by email and I welcome these; but would prefer them to use the ‘comments’ facility below. However you choose to respond your feedback is the main driver of this blog.

see also

Fighting fatalism

John

Author, 2077 AD

The malevolent minority

In front of me is a copy of the New Internationalist. It campaigns for a better world, one free of rapacious capitalism, insatiable consumerism, racial prejudice, exploitation of the vulnerable, and want of basic needs, with full human rights, freedom of speech and self expression for all. Worthy objectives which most would support.

 Yet to get to that stage we have to deal with the world as it is, recognising that all societies, not just our multinational capitalist system, are filled with imperfect human beings, and that among these are small groups led by people who most of us, especially  those living in the developing world, would call evil, or at least  of evil intent. Not only do they try to indoctrinate and exploit the downtrodden, but they wish to destroy democracy and threaten most of the gains, both material and intellectual, which have emerged from the Enlightenment. The human rights granted to citizens of western societies are seen as a weakness to be exploited in their mission of destruction. Were they to be successful they would replace democracy with a fascist dictatorship, calling it, for example, an 'Islamic' regime (an insult to the true followers of Islam).

Dangerous technology eventually, but inevitably, migrates out from government, university and commercial laboratories. If malevolent minorities can use suicide tactics and AK47s and the fear of innocent civilians to damage the society they hate, it is not difficult to imagine what they would do with powerful ordnance or biological agents at their disposal.

 Admittedly, some of this technology is unjustly used by the regimes which presently control it. But these regimes, even the worst of them, are accountable to their electorates or subjects as well as to global institutions such as the International Court of Justice (UN), European Court of Human Rights, the World Bank and the IMF.

Much is said about the colonial and imperial past of western nations, especially in the UK. That is history, although some exploitation continues and we have the freedom to reduce it. Today we have admirable aid efforts and try to raise the standard of living of countries we previously exploited. Even those exploitative times left legacies of democracy, education, medicine and infrastructure. All these achievements, past and present, are thwarted by tiny terror factions and endemic corruption.

In short, our western society has its faults; but it also permits us to acknowledge and atone for them by helping the developing nations.   To let it be destroyed would not only mean a long, brutal war but result in a dictatorial empire which would itself be unstable and which would involve yet another war.

The battle for justice and human decency is not, I maintain, between the developed and developing nations or  the rich and the poor, or capitalists and socialists, or green activists and climate change deniers, or Catholics and Protestants, or Sunnis and Shias, or Moslems and Hindus. It is between good and evil within each category. You know when good is winning, because good Catholics do not fight good Protestants, good Sunnis do not fight good Shias - good people of any religion, race, or political persuasion do not fight each other or those from any other group.

 Unfortunately, at present it is difficult to fight this battle in the radical, non-violent manner speculated upon in 2077 AD but for all our sakes it has to be won if humankind as we know it is to reach that not too distant time.

John

Author, 2077 AD

Reason: enough to stop war?

In the excellent publication BBC Wildlife  (wildlifemagazine@bbcmagazines.com)   I read a fascinating article called ‘Of Ants and War’ by Dr Rob Dunn (Dec 2010 issue, p.66 – 71).  This reports on the competition for limited resources between cooperative groups of ants, as observed by Bert Holldebler. It  involves violent death and mutual posturing to assess the enemy. Dr Dunn reports Hollberger as saying

‘Wherever you find highly cooperative societies, whether slime moulds, insects or primates (including humans) you will inevitably encounter discrimination and aggression against members of neighbouring societies.’

Then Dr Dunn goes on to say that in ants the tendency to often ferocious competition and wars is balanced by ritual dances etc. He concludes that we humans must use reason to hold back from conflict.  Given the ever growing evidence for intelligence in animals, together with the fact that reason is as likely to make us launch into war as to refrain from it (e.g. when we perceive we have a strategic advantage), what uniquely human attributes might make us freely choose peace even when we feel sure we would win?

 Click below to comment.

John

Author 2077 AD

Ubunta

According to my Word Origin Calendar  'ubunta'  is a word 'common to several Bantu languages in southern and eastern Africa, conveying a concept that embraces the interconnectedness of all people and that encourages peace and good treatment of others.'

Such sentiments are subscribed to the world over but there seems to be something inside us or acting on us which goes against it. As soon as resources become scarce the noble principle of ubunta is likely to be eclipsed.

So the idea needs to be sanctified for it to stand the test of hard times. Various religions make it a sacred principle but there are few genuine followers of any religion because of worldly distractions and the presence of bad people in the institutions which purport to convey the source values of the religion. So the onus on today's spiritual leaders is to reform their teaching of the divine moral laws which unite the various classic faith systems at source and to lead people in putting them into practice.

My question to agnostics, humanists and atheists, who, I would argue, cannot deem anything sacred, is how do we internalise this idea so deeply that we don't forget it when our stomachs are empty? If we could do that it would help all sectors of humanity, religious or otherwise, to be governed by it.

At the very least our media and computer games industry should be propagating and inculcating the concept of ubunta. In many parts of the world  there are games which actually reward the player with points for doing evil, albeit imaginary evil. People playing them seem decent and they will assure you that they are well adjusted and just having 'fun' and do not want anyone interfering with their rights. Are they the same people who claim that adverts don't affect their buying behaviour? I hope not, because there is well documented evidence that the billions of dollars spent on  the advertising industry has not been wasted.

On the positive side ubunta could be  encouraged and strengthened through computer games in an entertaining way.

Comments welcome.

John
Author, 2077 AD

Is it OK to be certain you are right?

My first reaction to this question is ‘no: that’s what causes wars.’ But on reflection I think this needs qualifying.

If you say ‘I am right to kill innocent people in the cause of my religion or ethnic group or country’ that is going to cause violence and counter violence and counter counter violence, and so on ad nauseam.

But what if you say ‘It is always right to love your enemies’?  Would that be likely to cause a war? If some other group of people decided to try to make you change your mind by force they would meet with no resistance – hence there would be no war unless others tried to defend you, in which case they would not be loving their enemy and, paradoxically, would not be agreeing to your statement of belief.

The complication comes in when your enemies are threatening your own family and friends. Or  threatening you when you have a family that depends on you.  Then, I feel, one must make a stand. You must try to defeat your enemies but do so without gratuitous violence and with unbounded mercy, i.e. still love them. If everyone forced to fight did so in this way, then war in general would gradually fade away. It might take a long time but at least the practice of war would be less barbaric in the meantime.

Perhaps you have something to say on this or an earlier blog. If so, there are empty boxes in cyberspace  waiting to be filled with wisdom. Just click 'comments' below.

John

Author, 2077 AD

A better world for some?

A short article  by Charlie Stross on Boing Boing is worth reading if you think the world is going relentlessly downhill.

 It argues that although the developed world is currently slipping back things are getting better for the majority of the population. Thanks to George for recommending it. I am sure that a determined pessimist can rake up some bad news to put a damper on this but it is nice to start 2011 with a positive feeling backed by evidence.

The advances in treatment of AIDS has to be a good thing; but the treatment only reduces the viral count . There is no cure in sight and what worries me is that HIV, being particularly aggressive and rapidly mutating, could mutate into something more virulant and which spreads in the same way as, say, influenza (e.g. by droplet infection). If the threat of dangerous, lethal outcomes is removed there will be no incentive to change the licentious behaviour which allows the HIV to thrive and mutate. I'm no biologist - am I missing something?

 I'm not being pessimistic about the past but just trying to do my infinitesimal bit to raise awareness of a possible problem.


John

http://worldpeace2077.blogspot.com/p/short-extracts-from-2077-ad.html

Bees for peace

Here is an extract from a web article on research on using bees for sniffing out explosives

The beauty of the device is that the bees are unhurt. A few hours of training and a couple of days later, the bees are released back to their hives and reintegrated back into bee society. Each bee is individually trained to recognize a different smell so hypothetically, the 36 bees contained in one handheld device could replace the far less cost-efficient bomb sniffer dog.

I was interested to see that the work is being done in my home county, Hertfordshire (UK). Not that it really matters, a long as technology of this kind is developed to the stage where widespread uptake is practicable,  initially in mine detecting,  presumably, but later in airports and in locating terrorist bomb factories . Here is the link:

 Honey Bees to Replace Bomb Sniffing Dogs?: New Tool Help Bees Detect Explosives and Possibly Disease http://www.suite101.com/content/the-honey-bee--replacing-bomb-sniffing-dogs-a218967#ixzz19tUjph2i

My impression is that this kind of work is going on worldwide and at quite a pace. If you know of any reports I am sure some of the readers would be interested. So please email me at
cosmik.jo@gmail.com


Author, 2077 AD