This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Beyond the Sacred

Thanks to Steve Zara for the link.


I gave a talk called ‘Beyond the sacred’, on the changing character of ideas of the sacred and of blasphemy, at a conference on blasphemy organised this weekend by the Centre for Inquiry at London’s Conway Hall on Saturday. Here is a transcript.

alt text

To talk about blasphemy is also to talk about the idea of the sacred. To see something as blasphemous is to see it in some way as violating a sacred space. In recent years, both the notion of blasphemy and that of the sacred have transformed. What I want to explore here is the nature of that transformation, and what it means for free speech.

For believers, the idea of the sacred is key to moral life. Detachment from the sacred, the former Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor claimed at the installation ceremony for his successor, Archbishop Vincent Nicholls, has been responsible for war and terror, sin and evil. In this view the acceptance of the sacred is indispensable for the creation of a moral framework and for the injection of meaning and purpose into life.

I don’t want to get into a discussion here about the relationship between religion and morality. As an atheist, I do not see myself as lacking a moral compass, or being unaware of boundaries, or being burdened by a sense of a purposeless life. What I do want to do is look more carefully at what we mean by the ‘sacred’. Religion, Leszek Kolokowski, the Polish Marxist-turned-Christian philosopher, acknowledged, ‘is man’s way of accepting life as inevitable defeat’. ‘To reject the sacred is’, as he puts it, ‘to reject our own limits.’ In this Tragic view of the human condition, the sacred exists to protect human beings from the flaws of their own nature. ‘The sacred order’, as Kolokowski observes, ‘has never ceased, implicitly or explicitly, to proclaim “this is how things are, they cannot be otherwise”.’

The sacred, in this sense, is less about the transcendent than it is about the taboo. The sacred sphere, as French sociologist Émile Durkheim pointed out a century ago, constitutes a social space that is set apart and protected from being defiled: a set of rules and practices that cannot be challenged. It provides a means of protecting not the kingdom of heaven but the citadels of earthly power. The sacred, Kolakowski observes, ‘simply reaffirms and stabilizes the structure of society – its forms and its systems of divisions, and also its injustices, its privileges and its institutionalized instruments of oppression.’ Blasphemy, and the sacred, in other words, are not simply about theology and religion, but also about politics and power. We can see the way that blasphemy and the sacred have helped speak to social and political power if we look at the history of blasphemy in Britain.

Read on

TAGGED: BLASPHEMY, POLITICS, RELIGION, SOCIETY


RELATED CONTENT

Update - Twitter exchange - Hard...

First Aid Kit - YouTube -... Comments

First Aid Kit - Hard Believer

Why Is Everyone on the Internet So...

Natalie Wolchover & Life's Little... Comments

A perfect storm engenders online rudeness, including virtual anonymity and thus a lack of accountability, physical distance and the medium of writing

Death of scientific evidence mourned on...

Meagan Fitzpatrick - CBC News Comments

Scientists, concerned citizens hold mock funeral in Ottawa to protest federal cuts

Should Depressed People Avoid Having...

Maia Szalavitz - TIME - Healthland 39 Comments

Do people with depression or other psychological problems have any moral obligation to forgo bearing children in order to avoid passing on their "bad" genes?

2,000 protesters support gay rights

Laura Graff - Winston-Salem Journal 14 Comments

Protesters travel to speak against Pastor Charles Worley, who gave a sermon May 13 that suggested gay people should be rounded up, placed in a sort of concentration camp, and left to die.

How the Web is killing faith

Hemant Mehta - Washington Post 41 Comments

"The Internet is blind faith’s worst nightmare."

MORE

MORE BY KENAN MALIK

To name the unnameable

Kenan Malik - Pandaemonium 15 Comments

But in the real world where societies are plural, then it is both inevitable and important that people offend the sensibilities of others. Inevitable, because where different beliefs are deeply held, clashes are unavoidable. And we should deal with those clashes rather than suppress them. Important because any kind of social change or social progress means offending some deeply held sensibilities. The right to ‘subject each others’ fundamental beliefs to criticism’ is the bedrock of an open, diverse society.

Non-believers can be bigoted too

Kenan Malik 50 Comments

MORE

Comments

Comment RSS Feed

Please sign in or register to comment