Comments on: Sven-Eric Liedman on the enchantment of religion http://sedgemore.com/2008/05/sven-eric-liedman-on-the-enchantment-of-religion/ physicist, journalist and science writer Wed, 16 May 2012 18:34:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Francis Sedgemore - Aliens are our brothers in Christ, says Vatican http://sedgemore.com/2008/05/sven-eric-liedman-on-the-enchantment-of-religion/comment-page-1/#comment-298 Francis Sedgemore - Aliens are our brothers in Christ, says Vatican Thu, 15 May 2008 02:16:38 +0000 http://sedgemore.com/?p=1083#comment-298 [...] as brothers in reason. What would Jürgen Habermas have to [...] [...] as brothers in reason. What would Jürgen Habermas have to [...]

]]> By: Francis Sedgemore http://sedgemore.com/2008/05/sven-eric-liedman-on-the-enchantment-of-religion/comment-page-1/#comment-278 Francis Sedgemore Mon, 12 May 2008 11:44:35 +0000 http://sedgemore.com/?p=1083#comment-278 Anja - Also Billy Connolly, who in one of his world tour of wherever programmes remarked that one should never trust those for whom the magical imagination has no place. As for religion as aesthetics, I refer only to the (rarified) intellectual debate. The all too real effects that religion has had, and continues to have, are painfully obvious. Anja – Also Billy Connolly, who in one of his world tour of wherever programmes remarked that one should never trust those for whom the magical imagination has no place. As for religion as aesthetics, I refer only to the (rarified) intellectual debate. The all too real effects that religion has had, and continues to have, are painfully obvious.

]]> By: Anja (via John) http://sedgemore.com/2008/05/sven-eric-liedman-on-the-enchantment-of-religion/comment-page-1/#comment-277 Anja (via John) Mon, 12 May 2008 11:21:27 +0000 http://sedgemore.com/?p=1083#comment-277 "... I cannot help thinking that the analytic tools of psychoanalysis, psychiatry and anthropology are better suited to a study of the rebirth of religion (if there is such a thing) than a rather dry socio-philosophy infused with Weber’s Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism". Absolutely. And it is in the contexts of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, anthropology et al. that religion can be discussed -- and criticised -- most fruitfully as a universally present but historically specific feature of human culture (warts and all). This seems to echo an interesting essay on H.P. Lovecraft (from "The Humanist") that I recently came across in the wake of a rather dispiriting seminar on "The Call of Cthulhu". The author, Robert M. Price, has the following to say about HPL's fictional cosmos of awe-inspiring creatures and the disturbing cultish behaviour that they bring forth: "... Lovecraft understood what many religious believers and rationalist critics of religion have alike failed to grasp: that the magical charm of religion is, at bottom, a matter of imagination and aesthetics. That once one knows this, one can feel free to rejoice in the imaginative dimension, gaining from it the aesthetic fulfillment religion offers but without making the sacrifice of the intellect that religion imperiously requires". If one is so aesthetically/imaginatively inclined, I would hasten to add. My one problem with this "religion as aesthetics" argument is that it seems to eclipse the very real effects that religion has been having in human history. You know, the Spanish Inquisition - "nice red uniforms" etc., etc., but for the rest of it .... Oh well. This comes via John, so that I won't be spammed again. Anja “… I cannot help thinking that the analytic tools of psychoanalysis, psychiatry and anthropology are better suited to a study of the rebirth of religion (if there is such a thing) than a rather dry socio-philosophy infused with Weber’s Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”.

Absolutely. And it is in the contexts of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, anthropology et al. that religion can be discussed — and criticised — most fruitfully as a universally present but historically specific feature of human culture (warts and all).

This seems to echo an interesting essay on H.P. Lovecraft (from “The Humanist”) that I recently came across in the wake of a rather dispiriting seminar on “The Call of Cthulhu”. The author, Robert M. Price, has the following to say about HPL’s fictional cosmos of awe-inspiring creatures and the disturbing cultish behaviour that they bring forth:

“… Lovecraft understood what many religious believers and rationalist critics of religion have alike failed to grasp: that the magical charm of religion is, at bottom, a matter of imagination and aesthetics. That once one knows this, one can feel free to rejoice in the imaginative dimension, gaining from it the aesthetic fulfillment religion offers but without making the sacrifice of the intellect that religion imperiously requires”.

If one is so aesthetically/imaginatively inclined, I would hasten to add. My one problem with this “religion as aesthetics” argument is that it seems to eclipse the very real effects that religion has been having in human history. You know, the Spanish Inquisition – “nice red uniforms” etc., etc., but for the rest of it ….

Oh well. This comes via John, so that I won’t be spammed again.

Anja

]]>