While the focus of this blog is to promote secular concepts in opposition to religion, as well as to point out some of the inherent absurdities of popular faith, I feel as if a lot of the ire generated by the atheism vs. religion debate is misplaced. Both sides of the argument oversimplify each other, if for no other reason than to generate a series of straw men to be knocked down by a blunt and ultimately fallacious point. I would like to take this opportunity to stand in defense of faith, not from a position of biblical literalism or moral condemnation, but from the perspective of someone who does not believe that rationality and religion are truly diametrically opposed.

To disclose my position fully, I am a practicing Jew and the main writer of one of this blog's sister sites, Judeo Talk. Judaism is often thought of as being as much a culture as a religious philosophy and while I don't entirely agree with that idea, I recognize that a significant part of why I believe what I believe today is because I come from a community that is somewhat more isolated and self-informing than those who grew up in Christian or entirely secular homes in America. Still, there is a difference between someone who was raised in a Jewish home and someone who continues to practice the faith into adulthood. Concerning that very difference, someone recently asked me why I choose to continue to live what I consider a Jewish life. My answer was, in so many words, that in my studies I've found a number of elements of my faith to be valuable for one reason or another, so I continue to practice.

It would take a book's worth of blog posts to describe everything about Jewish philosophy that I still find valid and worthwhile, but that's not my intention today. Rather, I'd like to explain why exactly I believe that my religious leanings can coexist with my secular education without dissonance.

Like many people of moderate, progressive faith, I do not believe the value of my religion is in its ability to describe the natural world. Anyone who believes a document like the Bible is even intended as a historical or scientific text obviously has no understanding of how it even came to be in the first place. The Bible is, at its best, a series of parables and lessons espousing a number of moral ideas, a philosophical treatise on the mistakes people have made in their interactions with one another and the ways we as a species might overcome those failings. Dismissing an entire enduring text because some people are unwilling or incapable of parsing its metaphors and symbols is simply ignorant.

It is little more than reductive to assume that all people of faith reject scientific facts just because a portion of the religious population does. There are plenty of religious people who accept the truth of evolution, cosmology, modern medicine and scientific method. Furthermore, they do so not in spite of their faith but out of a level-headed decision to optimize the application of their knowledge. Science is not a philosophy and it is not entirely rational to state that ideas applied to science, like ethics, are empirically true or even natural. Ethics and morals are subjective but not without value, just as religious philosophy is non-literal but still practical and applicable to our modern, rational lives.

Ultimately, I place religion in the same category as art and cuisine. It is not strictly necessary, but it adds a vibrant dimension to life. I don't wish that non-religious people adopt a faith and I don't feel sorry for or look down upon those who chose to lead an entirely secular life. I simply hope that, just like religious extremists, they adopt a more open mind concerning the usefulness of religion and its right place in our global society. As always, I am happy to answer any questions in the comments section here or at Judeo Talk.