Gabriella,
Because I perceive that religiosity has a useful effect on my emotions and perspective and I find religiosity interesting.
I find it interesting too – my point though was (and is) that calling values of which you happen to approve (as do I) “religious” is a misnomer.
I find the concept of something more than we can prove with our limited capabilities interesting. I find the concept of limitations interesting. I find the concept of something without limitations interesting. I find the concept of never really knowing or understanding how something without limitations works interesting. I find the concept of accountability and judgement interesting and especially useful in modulating behaviour. There is a lot more but you get the gist.
Yes, although other words for “concept” are “speculation” or “guess”. Which is fine, if incoherent. For my part I can’t get interested in something that’s “not even wrong” until and unless at least some basic definitional issues are addressed, but hey – that’s just me I guess.
That's exactly what I say. I also add that I find the belief useful and I say why.
If it works for you…
I don't lose any sleep over that. My experience of my kids are that they are clever and as they get older they can figure out for themselves what beliefs they find useful to hold on to.
Well, perhaps. My experience though is that those “indoctrinated” (to use your word) in childhood find it almost impossible to shake off the attendant beliefs in later life, however otherwise rational and reasoning they may be – and yes, however harmful to themselves and others the faith beliefs might be. That’s why so often religions want to get to kids before their critical faculties are developed – as the Jesuits say with good reason, “Give me the child until seven and I’ll give you the man”.
It's a time thing. If I am busy doing religious stuff which I find useful for me, there are only so many hours in the day and I may not have time to engage. Some people prefer to play golf.
Golf though doesn’t entail claims of truths that the claimants cannot know to be true, but OK…
I think the risk is worth taking. I like my X irrationality - it works for me. I'll leave it to the imperfect law enforcement services, legal system and intelligence services to prevent criminal activity as best they can.
Some might suggest though that it’s a risk you’re taking on behalf of other people – the victims at the end of the chain of irrationality you provide cover for at your nice end. I don’t want to come across as gittish here – you are of course entitled to believe (and to teach your girls) anything you like and that’s none of my or anyone else’s business. Suggesting that you’re sanguine about the law enforcement agencies picking up the pieces if that does happen though seems to me a somewhat “bracing” response to the issue.
This isn’t about you specifically by the way. I just look askance at any privileging of faith over rationalism from religious schools to bishops in the House of Lords.
I'm not sure what bit of what I said you are referring to. Would you mind quoting it?
Labelling the values of which you approve as “religious”. They’re no such thing, though some religions certainly endorse some of them. Some of them also incidentally endorse values of which you probably wouldn’t approve. As a mother of daughters for example, I’d have thought you’d at least raise an eyebrow at the misogyny practised in the name of your faith.
Oh ok. If that was all his or her "education" consisted of then I would agree with you. But if that was just one part of their "education", well it doesn't affect me any more than watching a kid playing with Lego.
I was thinking more of children in madrassas in places like Pakistan. How should we engage with such people when they become citizens of the world armed with an understanding of that world entirely derived from an ancient religious text?
