Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Is over-secularization a possibility? Part One


Secularization. We're all familiar with this notion - the idea that society should move from having religious foundations to being purely based on a logical and scientific point of view.  While I am a staunch supporter of the separation of state from any form of religious institution, every point of view should be scrutinized, and secularization is no exception.

We are more commended for keeping this in our
pocket than placing it in someone else's
Of course the benefits of secularization are obvious and very, very important.  The forwarding of medicine and a fairer treatment of people from all walks of life are advantages which nobody should scoff at.  But can it be taken too far?

Hand-in-hand with secularization comes the notion that objective grounds common to all people are to be held on higher grounds than anyone's subjective individual beliefs and while science and legislation are much improved by this approach, too much of this good thing may be venomous.

When do we stop downplaying subjective beliefs?  Religion is of course the main target of secularization but it's not the only thing that's subjective.

The mentality of objective being more valuable than subjective can very easily - and not so accidentally - be extended to value monetary gain and normative behaviour over any value given to kindness, compassion, selflessness, dignity, valour, and really any virtue imaginable.

The natural sciences aren't the only objective things out their.  Finances, norms, laws, economics and business exist too.  Likewise, religion isn't the only subjective belief - so is any virtue.

Indeed, the world already has adopted secularization into these areas.  Immoral business deals are carried out everyday, personal styles are dictated by fashion magazines, success is measured by the size of one's house, car or income and not by how true he or she has stuck to his/her ideals.

It seems like all modern society is caught up in a global dick-measuring contest.  And the only worthwhile contributions to these contests are things with universally understood values.  We talk about successful people - but these successful people are successful by virtue of fame or wealth.

Who's the most commended?  The honest green grocer or underhanded supermarket chain?  The lying politician or sincere activist?  The popular celebrity or the heart-felt musician?

Whilst secularization is so beneficial to the sciences, might it be carried to the point that what we believe in has absolutely no value whatsoever?  That we only cherish what all people want?  How is that any different from the complete and utter death of individuality?
This post was far too serious, so here's a light bulb to make light of the situation.
.....Get it?.....Make light.....like a light bul- .... fuck it.


We must draw the line somewhere.  And to begin deciding where to draw the line we must recognize that secularization is not the be-all and end-all of all social improvement.  Just like any other belief, omitting secularization from our scrutiny will definitely do more harm than good.



No comments:

Post a Comment