Willem Buiter on religion
This is the best Easter Message I have seen for a long time.
Al Baraka
http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/2008/03/idolatry-and-the-sanctity-of-whatever/#more-164
This entry was posted on Monday, March 24th, 2008 at 10:31 AM and filed under Articles. Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed. Skip to the end and leave a response. Trackbacks are closed.
4 Responses to “Willem Buiter on religion”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
If Christ had believed in the sanctity of life, he would have cut a deal with Pontius Pilate, Mr Buiter says. his argument rests upon his statement, “Treating life as divine is heathen behaviour – paganism.”
Posted on 25-Mar-08 at 3:27 am | PermalinkWell, I’m sort of a Christian Heathenist, I guess.
Never mind, to read this is a refreshing privilage. I am left in awe at his obvious brain power and clarity of thought. My own thought processes are not so clear. The jury is out and may well be hung. Life is pretty divine. God is life, life is God. But then I would have cut a deal with Pontius in a flash.
Ben:
I’m not sure I agree with Buiter. Consider the phrase he relies on: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
What if you are a masochist? Or a sadist? What would happen if you “loved your neighbor as yourself” in those situations? I’m not trying to be silly here. But as you can see, if you put total and complete “faith” and “power” into a single phrase, it is at best folly and at worst dangerous to put it into one that has inherent problems, even in only relatively few instances.
In this regard, since the phrase “Love your neighbor as yourself” “falls apart” based on the above, almost all that follows from it in Buiter’s theo-philosophy must in turn be flawed.
Thus, while I agree – both for some of the same as well as different reasons – re the use of “holy” to describe cities, etc., I disagree with his basic premise, and would suggest that it is bad theology to claim that Scripture – or Jesus Himself – would support euthanasia or abortion, especially as a general “rule” based primarily on “loving one’s neighor as oneself.”
Peace.
Posted on 25-Mar-08 at 10:09 am | PermalinkI also do not agree with Buiter, but I did find his argument enervating.
Posted on 25-Mar-08 at 11:18 am | PermalinkI had never before considered the proposition that ‘God is divine, life is not.’
It shows where philosophy can take you, and although enervating, I must admit to the sneaking feeling that I would be better off thinking about something else.
Good to have your insight, Ian.
To be honest I haven’t quite got my head around Buiter yet either but I found his Easter message refreshingly commonsensical and iconoclastic.
Ian I think your argument about sado-masochists wanting sado-masochism for their neighbours (regardless presumably of their neighbours’ sexual/psychological orientation) as invalidating Buiter’s thesis a little disingenuous. I guess he might agree that anything could go between consenting adults/neighbours (or would he?) but not that you should attempt to impose your preferences upon your neighbour nor to try to seduce them into a way of life that would amost certainly be considered aberrant by Christ and the Saints. Oh dear – I hope there are no swingers reading this!
There must be some objective basis for deciding what is best for our neighbours otherwise we could all fall prey to any nutcase like Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot justifying their behaviour towards their fellow men by deciding that they were only doing what was best for them – i.e. loving their neighbour. I cannot believe that someone of Buiter’s obvious intelligence cannot have thought that through.
Anyway – I am glad of both of your input and that my bringing Buiter to your attention provoked it.
Pax vobiscum
Posted on 26-Mar-08 at 11:53 am | Permalink