Pandagon: The problem of ever separating religion and politics completely

[phantom power]

See, the problem I have with religion is that it exploits the gray area in people’s thinking between metaphor and the thing that metaphor describes. For no doubt complex cognitive reasons, at various times every human being has moments of being too literal, though I have no doubt that some people have problems distinguishing between the literal and metaphorical more than others. Metaphors are extremely useful things; human communication would come to a grinding halt if we couldn’t use metaphors and instead had to describe everything in straightforward, literal terms. I couldn’t have even written that prior sentence.

Religion trades in metaphors that speak to deeper values and ideas. In and of itself, that’s no big deal. The same thing is accomplished in art, literature, bullshitting around the campfire, etc. But what I think helps create chaos is the sense that religion then asks the participants to take some of the metaphors not as stories about something else, but as literal truths. And then reality and fantasy start getting all mixed up, standards on how to speak on certain subjects get all goofed up, and critical thinking goes out the window. What becomes a matter of private belief that’s not reality-based and therefore not really a matter for the world of secular politics (was Mary really a virgin?) and what is just a metaphor expressing a value that does have political dimensions that are appropriate for criticism become confused. Whether or not someone is bringing a value or a superstition to the table when she brings a religious belief gets all confuddled. What the believers themselves believe and what is just metaphors for what they believe is hard to separate, even for them.

It adds a layer of unnecessary confusion to the already confusing world of politics. Think about how confusing it is that in American politics, there’s a de facto irrationality test to run for most major offices—you don’t get to do it, unless you believe the literal truth that Jesus died for your sins and there’s a heaven you get to go to and everything. And then we start squabbling over whose church is teaching ridiculous, untrustworthy ideas, while everyone ignores the elephant in the room, which is that all of them are built on an idea whose literal truth is taken as well, gospel, but that couldn’t actually have happened. All other minor squabbles seem quite minor compared to that glaring issue.

http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/03/16/6905/