Introduction
The article “The articles of 21st-century faith” by Julian Baggini is the author’s attempt to reimagine the definition of religion to fit realistic expectations set by a society that is increasingly atheistic.
Updating the Religion
The article is a proposition that the author makes for religious people. It consists of four concepts that Baggini describes as the way to make religion less outdated (Baggini, 2011). These articles show that religions have a particular set of values, do not require the belief in the supernatural, should avoid contradicting scientific communities, and admit that they are man-made (Baggini, 2011). Believers might not agree with them, but they can help in discussions.
Commentary
The article presents a refreshing look at a long-standing debate between atheists and religious communities. The author clearly shows that there are biases from atheists that may prevent fruitful discussions from occurring and addresses common points of conflict in his articles (Baggini, 2011). These four points are stated in a clear and concise manner to be easily understandable and non-vague to avoid further arguments. First and foremost, their goal is to bring order into an otherwise highly diverse range of worldviews.
Baggini’s articles can be seen as threatening to some, yet, under additional scrutiny, the reasoning behind their formulation reveals the need to implement something akin to these four concepts for faith to remain actual. The discussion sparks a new way of viewing faith: the author shows that its purpose is to become a common ground for people with particular values and personalities to converge and cooperate (Baggini, 2011). It appears that the author hopes that it could be difficult to argue with the core concept.
The value of the articles needs to be analyzed as well. This suggestion was sent to both atheists and religious people so that the author would gain the most objective data possible regarding an otherwise controversial topic. Through such a conversation, Baggini attempts to create a link between atheist critics and believers. Articles are on-point with their definitions of how beliefs form communities, although other points may appear to be imposing. Three out of four points composed by Baggini call for the abandonment of the past postulates, on which some faiths were based in their entirety. Despite this radical move, such an attempt has a positive intention that has place to be.
The author imposes a challenging task upon himself and his proposition. Due to this complexity, Baggini does have to turn to a two-sided view on the issue of the definition of religion. Although Baggini (2011) first writes that atheists “want every believer to be two-dimensional,” he himself concedes to the necessity of clearly stated opposite views. These are the necessary simplifications that need to be made in order to create a concise arguing point.
Asking for a refusal of the claims opposite to those proposed by the author may appear offensive to some believers. The author outlines what it means when some religious people reject the proposed claims, which may appear to lack faith for some. As the author shows, the implied rejection of the articles opposite to those proposed by him also means that believers would admit that atheists were right at least partially (Baggini, 2011). It may set a dangerous precedent and cause a degradation of faith and its foundations.
Undoubtedly, these articles possess a degree of controversy since they may be understood as the call for dismantling the history of religion. However, Baggini (2011) clearly states that these articles may not “capture what is most important for any given individual.” They are not imposing new, updated views but propose a different look at the agreeable definition that is adequately limited to the real world (Baggini, 2011). In the end, it is up to each person to define what their belief means to themselves and what God or Gods they choose to pray to in what way.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the articles presented in Baggini’s paper present a topic worth discussing among religious communities, as their acceptance would be beneficial for the image of modern-day faith. Despite the potential controversies that can stem from such a modernization, the core concept of religion – one’s values and way of life – remains a centerpiece of the proposed claims. Although such articles can appear as imposing onto others’ beliefs, many faith practitioners can find them as a viable definition that would suffice modern-day expectations of societies with a growing number of atheists.
The four points for updating the concept of religion by Baggini have a foundation linked to the discussions of faith with non-believers. However, such a discourse may vary in its nature depending on the religious views of the involved sides. It is undeniable that the author wrote his article in an attempt to establish a conversation between believers and non-believers, yet these points may be too controversial for some people to accept. It can be argued that some religions are based on traditions that may be dismantled with the introduction of these articles.
Reference
Baggini, J. (2011). The articles of 21st-century faith. The Guardian. Web.