Yesterday's Post..

Our internet cut out just as I was about to post this yesterday...

It is still snowing here, but because it’s a bit warmer today we’ve got a slush city on our hands. Like I said, I’m good in my Sorel’s... but the wind is still discouraging me from going outside. Not that I haven’t been outside today – this morning I made a trip to the post office, and had my patience severely tested. There was a looong line... that was not respected. People jostled around the window, cut in line, and some people even left and came back to reclaim their space in the queue. I waited for about half an hour (without even knowing if I was in the right place – no one else seemed to be mailing letters)... and left. We also went downtown this morning; Freddy visited DHL and Steve and I checked out the World Gym – a potential gym for me! It was nice, but nothing special. (The woman just called to let me know the monthly rate – they usually sell memberships on an annual basis only – and she said it would be 9000 roubles!!! That’s over $350! I don’t think so...) I’m hoping that the weather might clear up a little bit so I can hit the park for a run...

So I finished The God Delusion, and my final impressions are much the same as my initial ones. I think that the book was too long - but could it have been any shorter? A book discrediting religion? Probably not.

Anyways, I think that Dawkins is way too brazen, self-confident and self-assured; he often refers to himself as "enlightened" and focuses way too much on Darwin’s theory of evolution. He completely discredits theology as a discipline, and refers to religion as a disease ("When I noted the symptoms of an individual infected by religion...") which seems pretty disrespectful (I wonder if he'd like to present these ideas to Ayatollah Khamenei?) This reflects one of his main points: religion shouldn't be afforded automatic respect - i.e. we shouldn't respect and accept someone else's beliefs just because they are religious. While I agree with this, I don't think that there's any need to be rude, and he often was quite rude. Anyways, the book didn't leave me an atheist or an agnostic but it did make me think about my beliefs. This was one of his other main points: we should question faith (especially in the face of science and Darwinism) and scripture. While all of this is a pretty acceptable phenomenon in the liberal West, it's not quite so popular in other religions. Other things that I liked about the book were the point that religion needs to be left out of politics - but I think we're in a little too deep for that. Also, he pointed out that religious wars and conflicts are often more about avenging previous wrongs than about theological differences; true, but very complicated... arg. I also agree with the fact that religion is often used to justify harmful or abusive cultural practises such subjugation of women - again, no good. This is such a complicated and complex issue that it's hard to even think about it all at once... my head hurts!

So, it was worth reading but... with a grain of salt. Religion has been around for so long... and has played so many different roles in different societies that it seems a little naive to think that we can, in the name of scientific evidence, abolish God and religion from human life. I think that the idea of God is changing (in some places) and people have different ideas about what "God" is, or what religion is, and about what role it might have in their lives. The big issue, in my opinion, at the moment, is extremism and fanaticism - and these issues can't be addressed without thinking about politics and international relations. Unfortunately. I think the best we can hope for, at least as individuals, is a balance between fact and whatever fiction we need to be happy and positively affect the lives of those around us. But then again, who defines what is positive? Or good? The debate could go on forever... just like the book. Doh!