Clearly, I’m not an atheist. But it’s important to note I am not a christian, either. Some would call me an agnostic, but I prefer merely to describe myself as spiritual. Raised (for the most part) Unitarian, I seek truth–to the extent it can be found. I do not believe in a personified, interventionist god. I believe in a force of nature that science has not–nor do I believe ever will–really explain, but like Stephen Jay Gould, I don’t think science need bother.
Proving–or disproving–the existence of “god” would be a very low priority in my lab, I can tell you that.
So, recently, Daniel C. Dennett, who’s work I’ve read and admire, had a medical problem that might have ended his life. He survived, and when he did, he thanked “goodness”. I have absolutely no issue with that. I’d thank goodness, too!
Where I think he’s mis-guided is in his chastising those who “prayed” for him. Oh, he’s quick to say that he appreciates the thought and that he understands the urge, but he wishes they’d do something useful:
“Surely it does the world no harm if those who can honestly do so pray for me! No, I’m not at all sure about that. For one thing, if they really wanted to do something useful, they could devote their prayer time and energy to some pressing project that they can do something about.”
Look, I understand what he’s getting at, but c’mon. This shit is getting ridiculous. The idea of “praying” or even saying, “you’re in my prayers” isn’t any more “wasteful” or “useless” than saying “you’re in my thoughts”. Is it wasted time to take a moment and stop, reflect on the state of a close friend or loved one, whether that thought is based in religion or secular humanism? The idea that someone is wasting their time because they are offering their support in form of prayer is just plain stupid. It’s no different (and I would agree no more effective) than saying, “I thought about you today.”
Yes, yes, I understand that if you’re a friend of Dennett and you know that he would feel the best way to honor or express care for him was plowing into your work and getting something remarkable done, well, by golly, that’s what you should do. But again, I’m calling bullshit. Humans, whether they believe in “god” or not should care about each other and the people in their lives. When they express that care as a thought, gesture or even–gasp–a prayer, it’s never useless and it’s never a waste of time.
Perhaps he’s speaking to the activity of prayer in some denominations, where praying isn’t something you multitask at. It’s not casting an idle thought your friend’s way while you’re going on with your day. Quiet, direct, soulfull conversation with an Other. Time that is, arguably, wasted when there isn’t actually an Other there with which to converse.
[The idea of “praying” or even saying, “you’re in my prayers” isn’t any more “wasteful” or “useless” than saying “you’re in my thoughts”.]
It is if you think that prayer accomplishes something. No one imagines “I’ll think about him” will make any difference; many people image “I’ll pray for him” will make some sort of difference. So, yes, prayer is arguably more wasteful because it uses time you intend for accomplishing something rather than time for idleness.
[It’s no different (and I would agree no more effective) than saying, “I thought about you today.”]
I disagree, and even if we ignore what I wrote above. Saying that I’ve thought about you simply means that I care. Saying that I’ve prayed for you says more, however. Obviously telling you about it can’t make the prayer more powerful. I also doubt that people who prayed for Dennett simply prayed that he would get better. Don’t you agree that most probably inserted some “I hope he sees the light soon before he croaks, Lord”? Sure they did. In such a context, telling a person that I’m praying for them is a way of slipping in there something about how I’m right, they’re wrong, and they’ll go to hell if they don’t shape up. It’s a way of being arrogant without being overt about it. When someone like Dennett has to deal with such things all the time, of course he’ll get in the habit of asking people to not bother.
To be fair, I guess I don’t really know *how* people pray, since I don’t do it myself. I never assumed it was a multi-tasking activity, though. I always thought it was more like meditation; that it required attention and concentration. Any christians out there who can shed light on that?
I wasn’t trying to say it was the same as casting an idle thought. I was trying to say that, even if it is a dedicated time, let’s say, five whole minutes. It’s five minutes devoted to someone that you *do* care about, in a way that is compatible with *your* beliefs. I don’t think that the five minutes of “lost productivity” is a waste any more than meditation would be. Or a “moment of silence”. Or any other of the various cultural ways we take time out of our lives to consider the other.
On the contrary, I think that the fact that you were willing to donate that amount of time to another is a good thing–whether you do it through prayer or by hopping on one leg and shouting at passer-bys, “John Smith is sick and I want him to get better!!” Personally, I think both are about as equally effective in actually generating a change in John Smith’s health. But I think that saying neither is _worth anything_ is incorrect. I believe if more people took some small portion of their day to care about another I think the world would be a better place–and to me, that’s quite productive.
Now, I do suspect that some (although I won’t go so far as to say all) probably inserted some kind of, “Let John see the light” kind of request. So what?
If it turns out the atheists are wrong (again, I don’t think so, but the mark of someone with an open mind to inquiry is the ability to say, “then again, I could be full of shit”) so if atheist are wrong and there is an interventionist god, then his friends did him a solid.
But if it turns out the christians are wrong, then it’s a superfluous request. No harm, no foul. Unless you view it as an assault on your friends belief. That’s going to depend on the friendship, I suppose. Even Dennet forgives his religious friends for their remarks.
Joe claims it’s a way of slipping in the moral superiority far too often exhibited by the religious. That may be. And I’d agree, if done with that intent, it’s crappy of them. But it might also be a way of telling your friend that not only were you thinking of them and hoping they were doing well, but that you were doing so in a way that actually had personal meaning to you.
I concede that if you know your friend is anti-religion (and far too many atheists I’ve met are evangelically atheists which is just as annoying as evangelical christians) then perhaps you should just pray on your own, and tell him you care without mentioning the whole god thing–that would be the respectable thing to do.
But if your reaction to someone caring enough about you to hope that you are well is to cynically question their motivation… well, maybe you need to work out some of the “bitter” in your life and get back to that important work before you die. It’s really hard to be productive when you’re dead.
“Is it wasted time to take a moment and stop, reflect on the state of a close friend or loved one, whether that thought is based in religion or secular humanism?”
To the extent that the person praying thinks it’s accomplishing something in the way of expediting someone’s recovery, for instance, then yes, in my opinion, I think it most definitely is a waste of time on the part of the prayer, just as wasteful devoting one’s thoughts to someone is. What does that actually accomplish?
What alternatives Dennett was referring to, however, are beyond me!
Funny coincidence–I was just having this discussion with a few friends recently. I absolutely see your point, but must admit that I feel a twinge of discomfort when someone involves me in their Christianity against my will. It’s like a milder version of the violation I would feel after being told by a creepy scuzzbucket that he’d been thinking about me while masturbating. With all the resentment I still harbor toward the Pentacostals in my hometown (the ones who told me that my brother is a ree-tard because my parents are sinners and God is punishing them), I shudder at the thought that I am being involved in a Christian ritual (even if the Christian in question isn’t a psychotic hypocrite).
Though the sentiment is appreciated, in a small way.
That is all.
Thank Goodness! *
Well, it looks like a done deal: the dems take the senate, too!. Between this and Rummy, it’s like Christmas came early. Just don’t fsck it up!! (Which means, someone please tell John Kerry he need not run again.) *I would say thank god, bu…