Monday, February 11, 2002

SPEAKING OF JUNG: From that same Yahoo list, an interesting London Review Of Books piece on evolutionary psychology explanations for religion, found in this book by Pascal Boyer. I don't get why Jung is never mentioned in these biology of religion things; wasn't Man, The Religious Animal the major plank in his platform? Maybe sociobiologists are nervous about referencing him, for fear of association with some of the goofier Jungians. The title of said book --Religion Explained-- turns me off right away as it reminds me of the we-got-all-the-answers-right-here-right-now snottiness of Consciousness Explained --I mean, come on, make your case and move on. The reviews from the Amazon page say the book suffers from not making its case right away. I still want to read it, though. Anyway, the London Review thing is highly worth reading; here's some speculation on the future of religion:

The future of gods, spirits and ancestors is, however, more problematic. We may not be witnessing the universal trend towards secularisation which was mistakenly predicted by many 20th century sociologists of religion. But there has, all the same, been a good deal of the Entzauberung - 'disenchantment', or literally 'demagification' - which Max Weber took to be one of the defining characteristics of the modern world.

This may run contra that speculating of a Secular North, Religious South found in that Atlantic article I mentioned. Maybe modern life just makes religion a little more comfortable, like it does with the rest of one's life:

Human beings may continue to believe all sorts of things, both metaphysical and ethical, that Boyer is unable to share with them, and to define themselves in relation to those beliefs to the point of being willing to kill other human beings who refuse to share them. But supernatural agency is no longer quite what it was. To put it no more strongly, Hegel had a point when he remarked that 'before the statues of the gods we no longer bend the knee.'

So maybe religion doesn't have the force it once did just because we humans aren't as all red-in-tooth-and-claw (or however that goes) as we once were. And I think having less to worry about to insure one's survival is, on balance, a good thing.

No comments: