Page 1 of 2

Religion Critics?

Posted: 23 Dec 2012 08:24
by kindjal
I feel, in Herbert's works a critic to religion.
How deep and strong is for you(if there is any) this critic?

I think that Herbert think that religion is bad and faith is good.
The priesthood and the church, as long i have interpreded Dune works, are the very enemy of the mankinf.
Religion means not only super-natural belifes but also science(Tleilaxu and Ix) and logi/BG).

What ypou think?

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 23 Dec 2012 09:19
by Freakzilla
He obviously points out how religion is used as a tool to control the masses. How do you see faith as a good thing in the Dune series? The Fremen faith in their messiah was totally used by him to achieve his own agenda and eventually resulted in their destruction.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 23 Dec 2012 13:15
by kindjal
Well i see a duplicity in Herbert's works.
Faith(the good, traditional faith of the frem, for exemple) and Religion(in latin meaning of complex of cults, superstition).
I feel is also what Paul said in Children of Dune.
But this may be only my feeling.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 23 Dec 2012 17:30
by Naïve mind
"What is it you really want to know, Siona?"
"What you believe!"
"Ho! You ask after my faith. Well, now-I believe that something cannot emerge from nothing without divine intervention."
His answer puzzled her. "How is that an. . ."
"Natura non facit saltus," he said.
She shook her head, not understanding the ancient allusion which had sprung to his lips. Leto translated: "Nature makes no leaps."

-- from God Emperor of Dune

This segment gives the impression that the author is speaking through one of his characters. If so, this is a fairly strong theist position; God exists, and moreover, his existance is self-evident from the existance of the Universe.

Those of us who have studied Frank Herbert's life and beliefs (or have at least read his biography) may be able to answer this more conclusively.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 24 Dec 2012 09:10
by Nekhrun
Naïve mind wrote:
"What is it you really want to know, Siona?"
"What you believe!"
"Ho! You ask after my faith. Well, now-I believe that something cannot emerge from nothing without divine intervention."
His answer puzzled her. "How is that an. . ."
"Natura non facit saltus," he said.
She shook her head, not understanding the ancient allusion which had sprung to his lips. Leto translated: "Nature makes no leaps."

-- from God Emperor of Dune

This segment gives the impression that the author is speaking through one of his characters. If so, this is a fairly strong theist position; God exists, and moreover, his existance is self-evident from the existance of the Universe.

Those of us who have studied Frank Herbert's life and beliefs (or have at least read his biography) may be able to answer this more conclusively.

Didn't Byron say that Frank was an atheist? Not that we'd want to source him or anything, but it might give some indication.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 24 Dec 2012 09:46
by SadisticCynic
At the end of the biography section on his Wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Herbert#Biography) it mentions that Frank was raised Catholic but adopted Zen Buddhism as an adult.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 24 Dec 2012 09:58
by Nekhrun
SadisticCynic wrote:At the end of the biography section on his Wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Herbert#Biography) it mentions that Frank was raised Catholic but adopted Zen Buddhism as an adult.

I saw that after doing a quick search but it references this page:
http://www.adherents.com/people/ph/Frank_Herbert.html
They don't provide any evidence for that statement. I wonder where it came from.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 24 Dec 2012 10:02
by Nekhrun
Found Byron's reference to it: forum.dunenovels.com/viewtopic.php?p=22663#22663

Byron wrote:
William Smits wrote:...I'm particularly asking this to those of you here who actually KNEW Frank Herbert.

May I ask what was Frank Herbert's Religion? Or was he an Atheist? ...


Frank waffled quite a bit but I actually asked him this around 1979 and he said, "Atheist."

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 04 Jan 2013 12:02
by inhuien
Nekhrun wrote:Found Byron's reference to it: forum.dunenovels.com/viewtopic.php?p=22663#22663

Byron wrote:
William Smits wrote:...I'm particularly asking this to those of you here who actually KNEW Frank Herbert.

May I ask what was Frank Herbert's Religion? Or was he an Atheist? ...


Frank waffled quite a bit but I actually asked him this around 1979 and he said, "Atheist."


Both the following of a region and the atheist path require faith.

If you chose not to decide you still have made a choice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpCASVFyQoE

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 04 Jan 2013 13:23
by Freakzilla
inhuien wrote:
Nekhrun wrote:Found Byron's reference to it: forum.dunenovels.com/viewtopic.php?p=22663#22663

Byron wrote:
William Smits wrote:...I'm particularly asking this to those of you here who actually KNEW Frank Herbert.

May I ask what was Frank Herbert's Religion? Or was he an Atheist? ...


Frank waffled quite a bit but I actually asked him this around 1979 and he said, "Atheist."


Both the following of a region and the atheist path require faith.

If you chose not to decide you still have made a choice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpCASVFyQoE


That's why I say I straddle the fence between atheism and agnosticism. I don't presume to KNOW that there isn't a God, but if there is he isn't worthy of my worship.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 04 Jan 2013 14:09
by inhuien
Well according to Dawkins there is his Spectrum of theistic probability. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_of_theistic_probability

You may find it useful in determining how uncertain you are. :)

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 04 Jan 2013 14:19
by Freakzilla
inhuien wrote:Well according to Dawkins there is his Spectrum of theistic probability. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_of_theistic_probability

You may find it useful in determining how uncertain you are. :)


Using that standard I'd say I'm between 'leaning toward atheism' and 'defacto atheism'.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 04:05
by Naïve mind
There is a particular virtue to organised religion that seems very desirable: the ability to motivate people for goals that will not be accomplished in our lifetimes. Europe is spotted with cathedral buildings that, with the limited tools available at the time of their construction, took a century, or more to complete. Chartres is a good example, but there are many more. Artisans, builders and donors were all more than happy to dedicate a significant part of their lives to a cause that they knew they would never see completed within their lifespans.

And there's nothing really like that today. Whatever freedom atheism gives us, it gives us one life to care about things. In some abstract sense, we may wonder what the world will be like for our grandkids, but that's it.

And when you think about it, there are many causes that, intentionally or by virtue of their ability to select believers, adopt some of the trappings of religion. People who campaign for social equality, global warming activists(*).

Sociologist William Sims Bainbridge has argued that if Space colonization is to be accomplished, we need to establish a Church of the God Galactic to encourage the current generations to make sacrifices on behalf of the future ones who will get to live on other worlds.(**)

I'm not sure if this kind of utilitarian mutation of religion is what Frank Herbert had in mind when he wrote about the way space travel shook the great human faiths. I think he saw space travel as something that happened to the great religions, not as something that happened because of them.

(*) I believe these two to be worthwhile causes, and it is beyond plausible that global warming is a destructive, man-made phenomenon. But at the same time, it is hard to ignore the religious overtones in both this message and the proposed solution.
(**) There's an updated version of his essay that refines the argument, but the original one is much shorter and easier to read.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 06:14
by inhuien
The artisan was a slave, the hierarchy ordained the construction of these edifices. The common man was nothing but chattel to the Bishops, Lords, Kings and Popes. The emaciation of Europe stated with the Magna Carta, which ultimate goal has yet to be realised. I'd rather be up a tree, happy picking fleas off my troop mate, than in this mess of hypocrisy we're stuck with at the moment. Change and die-back are around the corner, I wonder what will come after that.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 10:21
by Nekhrun
Naïve mind wrote:There is a particular virtue to organised religion that seems very desirable...

Not sure I agree with you there:



I don't think that atheism requires faith. Is it even possible to have faith in nothing?

I would agree with Richard Dawkins that raising a child to be religious is a form of child abuse. I know plenty of people who experienced the terror of thinking that they or someone they loved would be tortured in Hell for an eternity. I had a similar upbringing and don't think that I will ever completely be rid of the damage that was done. The day I left all of that behind was the day my life started to improve for the better quite drastically. The sooner people realize that this is all you get so you'd better start making things happen, the better off we'll all be.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 12:56
by inhuien
Nekhrun wrote:I don't think that atheism requires faith.


Well it is a belief based on no evidence, you can call it speculative assume or some such none sense. It's an theologist opinion based on the absence of empirical proof.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 14:30
by SadisticCynic
Nekhrun wrote:I would agree with Richard Dawkins that raising a child to be religious is a form of child abuse. I know plenty of people who experienced the terror of thinking that they or someone they loved would be tortured in Hell for an eternity. I had a similar upbringing and don't think that I will ever completely be rid of the damage that was done. The day I left all of that behind was the day my life started to improve for the better quite drastically. The sooner people realize that this is all you get so you'd better start making things happen, the better off we'll all be.


:text-yeahthat:

It scares me that it took so long to snap out of it. Although I still like to think I'll someday fix the damage.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 15:59
by Nekhrun
inhuien wrote:
Nekhrun wrote:I don't think that atheism requires faith.


Well it is a belief based on no evidence, you can call it speculative assume or some such none sense. It's an theologist opinion based on the absence of empirical proof.

That sounds silly to me. A belief based on no evidence. You could apply that to just about any myth then, or Santa or energy healing.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 17:21
by inhuien
It's a non belief, I have no proof one way or the other. Santa, Easter bunny or the Tooth Faire we can disprove. But the absence of an entity that caused this universe to exists we have no proof of or disproof. And until we are capable of creating universes we never will have. Get of your horse and on the fence.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 17:41
by Naïve mind
I never imagined a discussion between agnostics and other agnostics could get so heated.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 17:44
by inhuien
Then imagine the unimaginable.There are three shades of grey.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 17:48
by inhuien
Naïve mind wrote:I never imagined a discussion between agnostics and other agnostics could get so heated.

You misunderstand, it is a discussion between an agnostic an an atheist. Unless of course I misunderstand.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 06 Jan 2013 11:52
by Freakzilla
I agree that believing there is absolutely no 'God' does require some faith since there is no proof and it is only a belief.

This is why I don't consider myself a strong atheist.

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 06 Jan 2013 22:08
by distrans
dont we find that most admittedly religious folk faiths are predicated on maintaining beliefs contrary to what is in fact knowable?

they have story about this, this refusing to use your god given senses

hiding your talents under a bushel or
something like that

Re: Religion Critics?

Posted: 06 Jan 2013 22:42
by Nekhrun
inhuien wrote:
Naïve mind wrote:I never imagined a discussion between agnostics and other agnostics could get so heated.

You misunderstand, it is a discussion between an agnostic an an atheist. Unless of course I misunderstand.

I suppose I consider myself an atheist, though I think the very idea that I would need a label to identify that I only believe in things for which there is evidence is absurd. It requires absolutely no faith for me not to believe. Should evidence present itself that is contrary to one of my current beliefs then I would change my mind based on that. It is not faith to believe in something which can be observed and repeated.