Print

Print


"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of men is a  
demand for their real happiness. The call to abandon their illusions  
about their condition is a call to abandon the conditions that  
require illusions."  Marx

Best,
Michael

On Jul 3, 2007, at 9:53 AM, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:

> On 7/3/07, Richard Levins <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Yes. We have to deal with the dual nature of science,
>> as part of a generic unfolding of understanding of the
>> world, and as a commodity reflecting the needs of
>> the owners of the knowledge industry.Therefore there
>> is a two-sided struggle, against the pre-modern,
>> pre-capitalist  critique of science (holistic, static,
>> hierarchical, romantic, ahistorical and decontextualized)
>> and against the scientism and instrumentalism of
>> capitalist technocracy,  from a post-capitalist, dynamic
>> holism (dialectics). In places like India and Texas the
>> pre-capitalist fundamentalisms seem to pose the
>> immediate threat while in most of the colonial world
>> scientism is more directly the main oppressor, but in
>> all cases we have to reject both....But why the
>> adjective "dogmatic"  in referring to atheism?
>> Like any other intellectual current, some of us are
>> dogmatic and others quite flexible and open minded.
>> The critique of religion also has been an important
>> part of the resistance to obscurantism. In the
>>  broad anti-imperialist coalitions there is room for
>> believers and atheists and the need to respect both,
>> while both atheists and believers are also found in
>> the ranks of scientism.
>
> I believe so, too.  By dogmatic atheists I meant to refer only to
> those who, like the so-called New Atheists, draw a wrong political
> line, between the religious and the irreligious, rather than building
> a coalition of the religious and the irreligious against the empire of
> capitalism.
>
> That said, I think we who are irreligious can go a step further, with
> regard to Islam, and do what many of us have already done for
> Christianity through our interaction with liberation theologians: to
> think of certain kinds of religious practice not only as compatible
> with historical materialism in political practice but also recognize
> them as sources of strength for the religious -- in other words, to
> see the religious who can and do stand in (direct or indirect)
> solidarity with us as our allies not "despite" their religion but
> _because of_ their religion.
> -- 
> Yoshie
>