Bridges Between Us

Religion, whether Islam, Hinduism, or any faith, can be a be a source of comfort, hope, inspiration, a calling for compassion and integrity, connection to a community with whom one can celebrate and on whom one can depend on, specially when facing uncertainties that are often around us. But when that is taken beyond the realm of personal practice of those benovalent characteristics of religion, and as soon as it starts to transgress upon the freedom of thought, speech, and practices of any other person, whether rudely or subtly, it transforms from something that can be beutiful to something that is detrimental to the well being and advancement of both the individual and society.

Creativity and innovation are fueled by freedom of thought and practice, as long they are constructive. When religion begins to limit that, including in how one can perceive and contemplate the world, that has a suppressive influence on all facets of the psyche, be it small or large. So even if you think the suppressive effect on creativity is miniscule, multiplied over countless thoughts of countless people, over many years will result in such people falling behind others that are unhindered.

I am not grounding my views about this on empirical evidence, though recent research seems to be indicating this (e.g., Krause V 2021; Dandorova-Robert Z 2023; Liu Z 2018; and El-Haq MMG 2016), but rather something that should be deducible through inferential reasoning. Such inferences should be predicated on the today’s social context, not that of a 1000 or 2000 years ago.

Similarly, religion, extended beyond personal inspirational context, hinders scientific progress. Religion demands unquestioning belief and conformity, whereas the the basis of science is questioning, experimentation, evidence generation, and reproducibility. Thus when religion begins to require, even demand, conformity to it from anyone, overtly or inexplicitly, it starts to narrow the path of science. Einstein had said “the important thing is not to stop questioning”. And it was Ibn Sina who said that knowledge can be acquired only through the study of its causes.

Sadly, the hindering extension of religion has been prevalent in several societies for ages and continues today, for the benefit of some. The extension of religion into the state, into law, and into education, and the overt as well as disguised propagation of religion to define, differentiate, and influence individuals and groups are saddening realities of such extension of religion (including Islam, Hinduism, and christianity) in many countries, to varying degrees. My hope is that will decrease and dissappear.

I do not think that of religion has been or is the only barrier to innovation and advancement, but it is one that could have probably been avoided, if sufficient number of capable people had tried to prevent that, instead of reacting to with complacency.

In my view, the beauty religion holds depends on what we understand it to be. For if in the name of religion, one subjugates women to men, trangresses on their freedom, and holds them unequal, or does these injustices to any one, then it’s no longer the light that it can be. In my view, the extension of religion beyond an inspiration for oneself to try to be a better person and care for others is when the light dims. The most negative forms of such extension expresses itself through the application of religious law and fundamentalism. And no matter in how sanitized and innocuous appearances such extensions may present itself as, the underlying repressive drives will always seek amplification.

In my view, and regrettably, the acceptability of the extension of religion to ordinary, often poor, people in many societies and in many circumstances was not necessarily because of thier the lack of knowledge and understanding but the lack of progressive, fair, non-corrupt individuals and institutions. Though ordinary people often do not have the opportunity to obtain education about science, sociology, civics, and philosophy (I hope they will have in the future, as this is one of the important things that can be beeneficial to them), I belive they, whether in villages, cities, or slums, still understand what affects them and how. However the lack of viable, fair, non-corrupt alternative institutions and activities that provide all (not just some) paths of economic and social sustenance and the realization of their hopes and dreams for themselves and their families have often left them no choice but to acquise to such extension of religion in the past. I think we must strive to create a clear path to away from those constraints.

My intent is not to philosophize for the sake of it. I know some find it fashionable to criticize the discussion of philosophy as being very academic. Philophical discourse may not be an answer for all illnesses but it can be a part of a process towards a solution. My intention is to express my thoughts and generate discussions among friends. Those two things should be doable. In addition, such discourse should be based on information and data, and an analytic mind to research for the answers.

How well such discourse is helpful, however will depend how we participate in it. For it be productive,

it should enable us to freely think about how achieve visible and perceiveable improvement in our social systems, institutions, and the human situation for all persons. It should enable us to be open minded on how we consider the circumstances affecting our efforts. It should enable us to focus on small day to day issues as well as larger conssiderations. Or it will be a fruitless investment in such efforts.

Philosophical discourse can be informative to what we strive for. I think thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Al-Thani, Rousseau, Hegel, Marx, Confucius, and Hamilton have all tried, from the vantage point of the stage of social development where they were standing, and drawing from the knowledge of their predecessors and contemporaries, to better understand the nature of humans, it needs, and it’s contradictions. And tried to find solutions to those contradictions, perhaps the harder task. Perhaps, the knowledge we have gained since can take us further in that regard. More than a 100 years ago, we know that such nature has an evolutionary and biological explanation, that have biochemical bases, which are predicated on physical principles. Though such considerations are intriguing, one doesn’t necessarily needs to delve in such depth; zooming out somewhat helps to see the trees and the forest. One can try to seek, understand, and find solutions to consider.