Noam Chomsky on Religion (part 2 of 2)

An extract from Prof Noam Chomsky on the subject of religious fanaticism. It's a response to a question from a lady from the audience during one of his speeches. Source: 'Understanding Power: The Indispensable Noam Chomsky' edited by Mitchell and Schoeffel, pp. 50-51.

The lady's question was: "Fundamentalist religion has really taken off in the last decade, maybe as an outlet for some of this despair.. Do you have any thoughts about the significance of that development in the U.S.?"

Chomsky is God ;-)

Music is Requiem in D minor - Introit: Requiem Aeternam, by Mozart.

According to a 2008 Gallup poll, 44 % of Americans believe "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so." 36 % believe the world IS old but God guided evolution. 14 % believe in old world and no involvement by God.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Noam
• Chomsky
• religious
• fanaticism
• theism
• religion
• atheism
• atheist
• Christianity
• fundamentalism
• evolution
• secular

[hyperreality8]

minor point i guess but it takes up 2 slides... what is Chomsky saying about Bush not being the president? Is he saying that Bush added the words "so help me God"? I looked up Reagen and Truman and those words are part of their inaugurations also and I'm assuming of probably every other president....

[thorkyll]

@hyperreality8 I believe Chomsky was joking.

[hoppercap]

His views on religion are obvious. Any religious person could point out the same things.

People should know that Chomsky is a gatekeeper for the Zionists. He has no solutions, only obfuscations.

[thorkyll]

@hoppercap -- His words are not intended to be controversial, he is stating the obvious but sometimes the obvious needs to be repeated as a reminder about reality to the whackos.

[iiNDiTC]

If Chomsky is wrong. I don't want to know what right is.

[jasondelauro]

@1cyanideghost You're not alone. I usually agree with Chomsky's analysis, but I think his stance is too soft on religion. As I've mentioned above, the dangers (which he correctly presents) are too high when compared to the benefits which can be more productively fulfilled in other ways.

[jasondelauro]

One of the few areas where I disagree slightly with Chomsky. His defense (which probably isn't intended as a such, since he is opposed to irrational belief) is that religion provides an outlet to fulfill the human need of solidarity and other expressions. Needs that can be fulfilled and channeled in more productive ways. Then he offers the terrifying proposition that this can quickly and easily turn to a Fascist movement, and be used as a dangerous political tool of control. Too high a cost.

[owenivor]

"Populist Part" or "Populist Party"??

[fastballonly]

Nicely put as usual by Dr. Chomsky.

But I wonder how reliable are the polls that show the percentage of literal believers of the Bible etc.

If the figures indeed are correct, then Chomsky's point looms ever truer.

But, Christopher Hitchens argues that people lie to the polls when asked if they believe the Bible as the literal truth bcz admission to be athiest is still so abhorrent to them. And that those who don't believe the theory of evolution are people who know nothing about the theory.

[LoK3y]

@PurestLogic This isn't true. Your logic is faulty. Just because the "strongest motivational factor provided by religion...God." Does not mean that it is THE 'smf' across the board. Nor does it mean it should be THE smf. How about a secular factor such as "to live as a free and happy society." That certainly would clean up any clutter you get with religion; genocide, rape, stoning, slavery, etc.. Your bold assertion of a creator does not hold up when scrutinized with the evidence.

[PurestLogic]

@TrygviMurt But the mere philosophy of morality means nothing until it has some sort of a motivating factor. And the strongest motivational factor is provided by religion in the form of God. It is necessary that in order to practice a philosophy of goodness one must have a firm belief in some sort of a creator.

[1cyanideghost]

I disagree with quite a few of Chomsky's points and some reasoning, but his general premise is correct, still a great intellectual.

Thanks for the awesome videos, great read ;-)

P.S. folks, try to understand the psychology of why people need to resort to a religion, due to suppression, and constant feeling of lack of belonging to anything. Growing up with fanatic believers, and being one for a while myself(ages ago) - reason with them nicely.

I have to say Einstein had his perception correct.

[killallmullets]

Even as a Christian, I enjoy reading Chomsky's thoughts here. He has a nuanced view which I like, as so many athiests or secular humanists are content to simply bash religion.

[jorgecalivalle]

@hailmomo ,I think that by just expressing his ideas he's doing his part.There's no ONE clear solution.The world is not a simple mathematical problem that can be solved on a piece of paper, and if we dig dipper into this kind of stuff (rational thinking) and help with spreading it around we will be doing our part ,too.

[rhth79]

@TrygviMurt I believe that what we call religion was originally based on philosophical understandings, but was later hijacked by political power.