Why
this page?
Recent
developments in increasingly secularized Western societies, notably
the emergence of Wokeism, seem to me to be extremely serious, and
give the impression that the fears of Conservatives were
well-founded. Conservatives claimed that the disappearance of
religious belief would not lead to the emergence of a freer, more
rational, fairer society, but on the contrary that the result would
be an increase in irrationality, superstition, dogmatism and
intolerance. Western societies are currently evolving in the
direction predicted by Conservatives. Wokeism, a kind of generalized
Marxism, is part of this trend.
Over the last few decades,
unbelief has gradually increased in Western countries. But this is
“prosperity unbelief”. I
consider there to be three types of unbelief: prosperity
unbelief, Leftist unbelief and research unbelief. Dan Barker is a
research unbeliever. He was an Evangelical pastor and missionary for
19 years. But he gradually questioned his faith. Following a 6-year
search, examining the Bible as well as the arguments of apologists
and contradicts, he came to the conclusion that his belief was not
“the truth”, contrary to its claims. This is a
particularly difficult process, and for many reasons it is highly
unlikely that an Abrahamic believer ever
become an unbeliever in this way. I believe that humanity is
currently incapable of doing so, and that research-based unbelief can
only concern a small minority of the population. Prosperity
unbelievers, on the other hand, have never questioned their past
(un)belief, they’re simply not interested. When prosperity
increases in a society, prosperity
unbelief mechanically increases. Research unbelievers have no reason
to rejoice in the increase of prosperity
unbelief, on the contrary. As Dan Barker says, both people like him
and Christian apologists and missionaries are looking for people to
take an interest in the religious subject and fight indifference.
Indifference is the worst. I still prefer people to be believers. But
prosperity has bred prosperity
unbelief in Western society. What’s the result?
In
the materialistic model, the blind laws of nature have no purpose.
“Cranes” can explain the presence of a certain type of
order and, in some cases, an increase in complexity. One of these
cranes, the evolution of species, has already been discovered. It
explains how the blind laws of the Universe lead to an evolution of
living things from the simple to the complicated (giving the false
impression of intelligent design). But the blindness of nature’s
laws remains central to our understanding of it. There is no reason,
for example, why nature should conform to the politically correct
considerations of our time. Nor is there any reason why our brains
should be adapted to understand anything that falls outside the
“average world” (as Richard Dawkins calls it), since this
ability offered no Darwinian advantage. Knowing whether we’re
being chased by a lion or whether a particular hiding place is a safe
haven does offer a Darwinian advantage.
Such questions belong to the “average world”. We are
generally competent to find “the truth” on such matters.
But our brains are not suited to understanding the infinitely small,
the infinitely large or even metaphysical questions. The consequences
of an erroneous religious belief, based on an initial lie, can be
advantageous from a Darwinian point of view, and/or their abandonment
can have a catastrophic effect on a society.
According to
a certain political vision, every civilization is founded on a
religion, which constitutes its root. A civilization can only survive
if belief in the corresponding religion remains sufficiently
widespread. Otherwise, it deteriorates, even disappears. The
materialistic model does not exclude this political vision: the blind
laws of the Universe may well have led to this rule. Throughout
history, it seemed that in traditional Christian or Muslim regions,
the highs of religion corresponded to lows of civilization, and
conversely, that Christianity and Islam played more the role of “acid
rain” than that of root of a civilization. But recently,
Western society seems to be evolving just as Conservatives
predicted.
History is writing that unbelief is responsible
for this development, and in particular
for Wokeism. Yet I often come across the
views of research unbelievers who are horrified by what is happening
with Wokeism. We need our voice to be heard, we need to defeat
Wokeism. Can a society in which non-belief holds an important place,
where religion has lost its dominant position, evolve positively,
without falling into another (worse) form of religion, can it be
viable in the long term? It’s up to us to show it.