Thursday, January 04, 2007

The Evaporation of the Powerful Mystique of Religion by Daniel C. Dennett

reposted from Edge, World Question Center.

Chris Street edits in bold.

The Evaporation of the Powerful Mystique of Religion by Prof. Daniel C. Dennett

I’m so optimistic that I expect to live to see the evaporation of the powerful mystique of religion. I think that in about twenty-five years almost all religions will have evolved into very different phenomena, so much so that in most quarters religion will no longer command the awe it does today.

Of course many people–perhaps a majority of people in the world–will still cling to their religion with the sort of passion that can fuel violence and other intolerant and reprehensible behavior. But the rest of the world will see this behavior for what it is, and learn to work around it until it subsides, as it surely will. That’s the good news. The bad news is that we will need every morsel of this reasonable attitude to deal with such complex global problems as climate change, fresh water, and economic inequality in an effective way. It will be touch and go, and in my pessimistic moods I think Sir Martin Rees may be right: some disaffected religious (or political) group may unleash a biological or nuclear catastrophe that forecloses all our good efforts. But I do think we have the resources and the knowledge to forestall such calamities if we are vigilant.

Recall that only fifty years ago smoking was a high status activity and it was considered rude to ask somebody to stop smoking in one’s presence. Today we’ve learned that we shouldn’t make the mistake of trying to prohibit smoking altogether, and so we still have plenty of cigarettes and smokers, but we have certainly contained the noxious aspects within quite acceptable boundaries. Smoking is no longer cool, and the day will come when religion is, first, a take-it-or-leave-it choice, and later: no longer cool–except in its socially valuable forms, where it will be one type of allegiance among many. Will those descendant institutions still be religions? Or will religions have thereby morphed themselves into extinction? It all depends on what you think the key or defining elements of religion are. Are dinosaurs extinct, or do their lineages live on as birds?

Why am I confident that this will happen? Mainly because of the asymmetry in the information explosion. With the worldwide spread of information technology (not just the internet, but cell phones and portable radios and television), it is no longer feasible for guardians of religious traditions to protect their young from exposure to the kinds of facts (and, yes, of course, misinformation and junk of every genre) that gently, irresistibly undermine the mindsets requisite for religious fanaticism and intolerance. The religious fervor of today is a last, desperate attempt by our generation to block the eyes and ears of the coming generations, and it isn’t working. For every well-publicized victory–the inundation of the Bush administration with evangelicals, the growing number of home schoolers in the USA, the rise of radical Islam, the much exaggerated “rebound” of religion in Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union, to take the most obvious cases–there are many less dramatic defeats, as young people quietly walk away from the faith of their parents and grandparents. That trend will continue, especially when young people come to know how many of their peers are making this low-profile choice. Around the world, the category of “not religious” is growing faster than the Mormons, faster than the evangelicals, faster even than Islam, whose growth is due almost entirely to fecundity, not conversion, and is bound to level off soon.

Those who are secular can encourage their own children to drink from the well of knowledge wherever it leads them, confident that only a small percentage will rebel against their secular upbringing and turn to one religion or another. Cults will rise and fall, as they do today and have done for millennia, but only those that can metamorphose into socially benign organizations will be able to flourish. Many religions have already made the transition, quietly de-emphasizing the irrational elements in their heritages, abandoning the xenophobic and sexist prohibitions of their quite recent past, and turning their attention from doctrinal purity to moral effectiveness. The fact that these adapting religions are scorned as former religions by the diehard purists shows how brittle the objects of their desperate allegiance have become. As the world informs itself about these transitions, those who are devout in the old-fashioned way will have to work around the clock to provide attractions, distractions—and guilt trips—to hold the attention and allegiance of their children. They will not succeed, and it will not be a painless transition. Families will be torn apart, and generations will accuse each other of disloyalty and worse: the young will be appalled by their discovery of the deliberate misrepresentations of their elders, and their elders will feel abandoned and betrayed by their descendants. We must not underestimate the anguish that these cultural transformations will engender, and we should try to anticipate the main effects and be ready to provide relief and hope for those who are afflicted.

I think the main problem we face today is overreaction, making martyrs out of people who desperately want to become martyrs. What it will take is patience, good information, and a steady demand for universal education about the world’s religions. This will favor the evolution of avirulent forms of religion, which we can all welcome as continuing parts of our planet’s cultural heritage. Eventually the truth will set us free.

Peer Reviewed Journals - listed at EurekAlert!

What do all of these publishers have in common?

  • ACS Publications
  • AHA Scientific Publishing
  • AMA Publications
  • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
They all publish Peer Reviewed Journals. Here is a list of over 100 such Journals.

Examples of Peer Reviewed Journals

About EurekAlert!

EurekAlert! is an online, global news service operated by AAAS, the science society. EurekAlert! provides a central place through which universities, medical centers, journals, government agencies, corporations and other organizations engaged in research can bring their news to the media. EurekAlert! also offers its news and resources to the public. EurekAlert! features news and resources focused on all areas of science, medicine and technology.

News by Subject at EurekAlert here.


The Woolly-Thinker's Guide to Rhetoric

Here you'll find top tips for besting your enemies. As employed by the world's best woolly-thinkers. Learn, for example: how to play the 'biological reductionist' card to maximum effect; how 'language games' can help you out of a sticky situation; and how lucky it is that 'truth' is relative to particular discourses (especially yours).

Source: http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/

When celebrities speak on science

Sense About Science has urged stars not to dip their toes into tricky scientific issues without checking their facts first.

Here are some examples put forward by the charity of dubious science uttered by celebrities - together with the views of its experts.

Celebrities must check their facts before lending support to scientific research and campaigns, a charity has said. Sense About Science director Tracey Brown told the Today programme that many claims ran the risk of misleading people.

individuals with a 1% risk of heart attack or stroke, 35 or older, could benefit from taking statins to lower cholesterol.

My risk of a heart attack or stroke is 1-2% according to my recent cholesterol and blood pressure tests. Should I take statins?

Widening the use of statins, beyond current guidelines to people at low risk of heart attack or stroke, could be beneficial reported three newspapers (10 November 2006). The papers gave an accurate summary of a cost-effectiveness study, though the model had limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings.

  • Three newspapers (1-3) reported that individuals with a 1% risk of heart attack or stroke, who are as young as 35, could benefit from taking statins to lower cholesterol. Two reported that the cost of prescribing statins for people at lower risk than currently receive this medication was less than the cost of caring for patients who have a heart attack or stroke (2,3).

  • The newspaper articles are based on a cost-effectiveness model (4). The researchers extrapolated data from a randomised controlled trial of patients with heart disease or diabetes comparing the drug simvastatin to placebo for an average of five years. They used the data to develop a model assessing the lifetime cost effectiveness of taking statins and the cost effectiveness of using the drug with older and younger age groups and people at lower risk of disease than those included in the RCT. The authors concluded that treatment with statins is cost-effective in a wider population than is currently routinely treated based on current UK guidelines.

  • The newspaper articles were accurate in their report of the research. However, the research did not aim to investigate the benefits of taking statins in lower risk groups; it was specifically concerned with cost-effectiveness. It is not clear that all relevant costs were considered in the analysis. Further, the exclusion of adverse events, given the life time horizon of the analysis, is likely to impact on the results obtained. The results should be interpreted in the context of these limitations.

Systematic reviews

Information staff at CRD searched for systematic reviews relevant to this topic. Systematic reviews are valuable sources of evidence as they locate, appraise and synthesize all available evidence on a particular topic.

There was one related systematic review identified on the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) (5) and one review which is currently being undertaken and will be available in the future (6). Five related systematic reviews were identified on the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (7-11).

References and resources

1. 'Widen use of cholesterol drug'. The Independent, 10 November 2006, p22.

2. Lifesaver that costs £4 a month. Daily Express, 10 November 2006, p25.

3. Put 6m patients on statins, say doctors. Daily Mail, 10 November 2006, p4.

4. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. Lifetime cost effectiveness of simvastatin in a range or risk groups and age groups derived from a randomised controlled trial of 20 536 people. BMJ Online First.

5. Manktelow B, Gillies C, Potter JF. Interventions in the management of serum lipids for preventing stroke recurrence. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD002091. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002091

6. Moore THM, Bartlett C, Burke MA, Davey Smith G, Ebrahim SBJ. Statins for preventing cardiovascular disease. (Protocol) Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD004816. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004816.

7. Vrecer M, Turk S, Drinovec J, Mrhar A. Use of statins in primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease . and ischemic stroke: meta-analysis of randomized trials. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 2003;41(12):567-557. [DARE Abstract]

8. Law M R, Wald N J, Rudnicka A R. Quantifying effect of statins on low density lipoprotein cholesterol, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 2003;326:1423-1427. [DARE Abstract]

9. Balk E M, Lau J, Goudas L C, Jordan H S, Kupelnick B, Kim L U, Karas R H. Effects of statins on nonlipid serum markers associated with cardiovascular disease. Annals of Internal Medicine, 2003;139(8):670-682. [DARE Abstract]

10. Cheung B M, Lauder I J, Lau C P, Kumana C R. Meta-analysis of large randomized controlled trials to evaluate the impact of statins on cardiovascular outcomes. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2004;57(5):640-651. [DARE Abstract]

11. Amarenco P, Labreuche J, Lavallee P, Touboul P J. Statins in stroke prevention and carotid atherosclerosis: systematic review and up-to-date meta-analysis. Stroke, 2004;35(12):2902-2909. [DARE Abstract]

Consumer information

British Heart Foundation

NHS Direct - cholesterol

Previous Hitting the Headlines summaries on this topic

'Statins cut heart risk for diabetics'. Hitting the Headlines archive, 8 June 2004.