Secularisation is the best thing that could ever happened to society. (40 marks)


Secularisation is the best thing that could ever happened to society. (40 marks)

Secularisation is a theory developed in the 1950s and 60s developed from enlightenment thinking that religious belief would progressively decline as democracy and technology advanced. Many atheists would argue secularisation is the best thing that can ever happened to society this is because a society which is not dictated by religious beliefs and religious practice, where religion is a private matter rather than public and is separated far from government and state would be a great Society based on the principles of rationality rather than Blind Faith and superstition. However, religion is a major part of our society and without it we would lack the diversity that enriches our culture. Religions such as Christianity have contributed to the development of our society in areas such as government, medicine and law. Therefore, it would be wrong to assume that their influence is useless.  In this essay I will endeavour to show that secularism would not be the best thing that could happen to society due to the fact that secularism is also filled with flaws. I will be using scholars such as Richard Dawkins, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, and Peter Berger to present a balanced and weighed argument.

Jose Casanova identified three ways in which people talk about secularisation; the decline of religious beliefs and practice in modern society, the privatization of religion in a modern liberal democracy where religion should be private and should not be seen in public, and the secular separation of spheres of state, economy, science, which are set free from religious institutions. France is a secular society meaning that there is an absence of the church in government, state, government affairs and public matters. This has resulted in the removal of all state funded church schools and has led to a ban from wearing religious symbols and religious clothing in public space. The key idea is that religion should have no bearing or influence on the public world, and that the law should be based on a democratic and non-religious foundation. In the UK the state and religion have not separated. By this standards Britain is not a secular society. This is because although there is a decline in religious belief and practice, religion is still seen in public and it is well involved in government. This is shown by the fact that Queen Elizabeth II is the head of the state and the head of the church of England. It is also demonstrated by the fact that the Bishops of the church of England have sits in the House of Lords. This leads us to question, is a secular society necessarily better than a religious society? Although secularism focuses on rationality, it lacks to appreciate the element of passion involved in religion. A secular society focuses on advancement being made by science, these advancements (such as genetic engineering, abortion, euthanasia) do not fit in with religious beliefs such as the sanctity of life. Without the ethics of religion, these situations would be allowed leading to “slippery slopes” and the abuse of the weak (euthanasia of the old at the will of their younger kin for money). Religion prevents negative changes which are harmful to individuals in society due to their principles of justice and love. The problem is that this prevention can also be detrimental. Forcing a woman to keep an unwanted child or preventing a man with a cureless disease from getting a peaceful end seems inhuman. Religion has prevented many technological advancements which could have enhanced the quality of life of others. This suggests then that perhaps society would be a better place without religion. This is because it causes more problems that it seems to solve, perhaps people would have a better quality of life in a secular society. 

Freud argued that religion is produced by uncertainty and anxiety about things beyond our control, but it creates something unreliable and unhealthy. In “Civilization and its Discontents” Freud denounces religion as a lie and a delusion. He writes, “The religion of mankind must be classed as among the mass of delusions”. To him religion and modern religious beliefs are a delusion that exists to protect us from nature and fate.  In other words religion is a product of wish fulfilment, the experience of vulnerability we experience as children is made more tolerable by the invented belief that there is a purpose to life, with a moral code advanced by higher wisdom, and that any injustices in this life will be corrected in the next. A deity is invented to replace the sense of uncertainty with something uncontrollable. Religious beliefs are psychological inventions that exist to protect us from nature and fate. Freud believed religion is unhealthy. It is a cultural carrier for much negative information, dividing people and causing conflict. This shows that society is better without religion since it causes problems for the individual and society, a secular society would not have these problems since people would have to accept reality and conquer their fate rather than blaming or waiting for God. Although there are weaknesses to Christianity, it has values which contribute towards a stable society. Christian values such as unconditional love or self-sacrifice are not just human values, they are spiritual values which go against the selfish nature of human beings. Due to these spiritual values, Christianity provides a moral compass and establishes common understanding. 

Richard Dawkins argues that faith schools are damaging to society. This is because they create isolated communities and fail to integrate pupils. He argues that faith schools fail to teach the big bang theory and evolution properly, instead they provide creationism as an alternative. They also leave pupils open to radicalism. In Dawkins’ eyes, bringing up a child as a Catholic is a form of long-term psychological abuse. He cites an example of a Hell House, devised by a pastor in Colorado, where children were scared by what might happen to them if they misbehave. This can leave profound scars on a child’s mind. Christianity is filled with such extreme messages such as in Mark 9:43-44 which mentions the cutting off of offending hands. This shows how damaging religion can be to children. Dawkins quotes Nicholas Humphry’s “What Shall We Tell the Children” to illustrate his point further, “Children, I’ll argue have human rights not to have their minds crippled by exposure to other people’s bad ideas – no matter who these people are… In short, children have a right not to have their minds addles by nonsense, and we as a society have a duty to protect them from it.” This demonstrates that religion is an ideology which can damage children, this means that perhaps a secular society would be better for bringing up children. Then again, Dawkins is too extreme in his examples. Faith schools tend to teach science very well, this is shown by their high achievements in GCSE. They are also very diverse and tend to perform better overall in comparison to secular schools. There are people of different faiths and backgrounds within a faith school, dismissing the view that they are creating isolation. A study from Warwick University supports the view that students from faith schools tend to be more diverse and tolerant as well as being able to concentrate better. Perhaps faith schools do teach virtues inspired by religion which seems to have this effect. However, this is just a correlation, it might be the pupil’s disposition which has this effect, not the teaching of faith schools.

Sigmund Freud and Richard Dawkins have argued that religion is created by the human mind and that there are no spiritual realities outside of us. On the other hand, science changes our understanding of the world and human life, providing national accounts of life. In the 1960 sociologist suggested that western Europe would lead the way to secularisation and the rest of the world would follow. However, it is simplistic to argue that the world is secularising in the way Britain has. The majority of the world is still religious. Immigration has also brought a new religious population into the UK. The number of Pentecostal Christians and Muslims has increased whereas Anglicans have decreased, and Catholics have remained unchanged. Christopher Dawson argues that it is wrong to remove religion from culture, art, architecture and music. This is because it deprives people of the ability to make sense of their own culture as it is steeped in religion. British culture is steeped in religion, for example, when princess Diana died it was religion that brought the people together and the Queen is the head of the Church of England, therefore, to become secular is to lose one’s culture. Culture is what gives meaning to our lives, it would be wrong to therefore argue that a secular society is better than a religious society.

In conclusion, religions such as Christianity have contributed greatly to the development of society. It has inspired music, literature and law which is deeply ingrained within British culture. Christian thinking and principles are also still valid and useful to this day. It is doctrines such as Natural Law which have inspired Human Rights. In mediaeval times it was Christians who built schools for the poor, to this day, most food banks are setup and run by Christian volunteers and local churches. Christianity even played a major role in the civil rights movement since activists such as Martin Luther King Jr were religious, this inspired them with their peaceful movement. Christianity also teaches spiritual values which tend to differ from human values. This demonstrates that Society would be less cultured without the inspirations of religion. However, should we separate religion from the state in a multireligious society? Mahatma Gandhi said, “if I was a dictator, religion and state would be separate. I swear by my religion. I will die for it. But that is my personal affair. The state has nothing to do with it. The state would look after your secular welfare, health, communications, foreign relations, currency and so on, but not your or my religion. That is everybody’s personal concern!” this suggests that perhaps it is best if we live in a secular state like France, where religion is a private matter hidden from public life. This would mean that there would also be no predominant religion that is supported by the state such as the Church of England in the UK. The sits taken by the Bishops in the House of Lords are not divided fairly nor are they representative of the population. This makes it seem as if though other religions are inferior. However, instead of living in a secular society it would be better if we lived in a pluralist society with equal representation. The future King Charles being crowned as the “Defender of faith” instead of the “defender of the faith” is already a steady start to accepting a diverse society with people of all religions. This is better than any secular society as it creates tolerance and unity.


For more philosophy and ethics a-level essays click on the tool bar and go on my profile!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Augustine’s view of human nature is deeply pessimistic. Discuss. (40 marks)

Heaven is not a place but a state of mind. Discuss (40 marks)

Discuss critically the view that Christians should seek to convert people who belong to other faith communities. (40)