“The problem with the religious solution [to philosophical problems] was stated by Mencken when he wrote, 'Theology is the effort to explain the unknowable in terms of the not worth knowing.' For anyone with a persistent intellectual curiosity, religious explanations are not worth knowing because they pile equally baffling enigmas on top of the original ones. What gave God a mind, free will, knowledge, certainty about right and wrong? How does he infuse them into a universe that seems to run just fine according to physical laws? How does he get ghostly souls to interact with hard matter? And most perplexing of all, if the world unfolds according to a wise and merciful plan, why does it contain so much suffering? As the Yiddish expression says, If God lived on earth, people would break his windows.”

Source: How the Mind Works (1997), p. 560

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "The problem with the religious solution [to philosophical problems] was stated by Mencken when he wrote, 'Theology is t…" by Steven Pinker?
Steven Pinker photo
Steven Pinker 33
psychologist, linguist, author 1954

Related quotes

H.L. Mencken photo

“Theology — An effort to explain the unknowable by putting it into terms of the not worth knowing.”

H.L. Mencken (1880–1956) American journalist and writer

1940s–present, A Mencken Chrestomathy (1949)

Jorge Majfud photo
Jerry Coyne photo

“When facing “scientific” arguments for God like these, ask yourself three questions. First, what’s more likely: that these are puzzles only because we refuse to see God as an answer, or simply because science hasn’t yet provided a naturalistic answer? In other words, is the religious explanation so compelling that we can tell scientists to stop working on the evolution and mechanics of consciousness, or on the origin of life, because there can never be a naturalistic explanation? Given the remarkable ability of science to solve problems once considered intractable, and the number of scientific phenomena that weren’t even known a hundred years ago, it’s probably more judicious to admit ignorance than to tout divinity.
Second, if invoking God seems more appealing than admitting scientific ignorance, ask yourself if religious explanations do anything more than rationalize our ignorance. That is, does the God hypothesis provide independent and novel predictions or clarify things once seen as puzzling—as truly scientific hypotheses do? Or are religious explanations simply stop-gaps that lead nowhere?…Does invoking God to explain the fine-tuning of the universe explain anything else about the universe? If not, then that brand of natural theology isn’t really science, but special pleading.
Finally, even if you attribute scientifically unexplained phenomena to God, ask yourself if the explanation gives evidence for your God—the God who undergirds your religion and your morality. If we do find evidence for, say, a supernatural origin of morality, can it be ascribed to the Christian God, or to Allah, Brahma, or any one god among the thousands worshipped on Earth? I’ve never seen advocates of natural theology address this question.”

Source: Faith vs. Fact (2015), pp. 156-157

Russell L. Ackoff photo
Kwame Nkrumah photo
Euripidés photo

“Dionysus: He who believes needs no explanation.
Pentheus: What's the worth in believing worthless things?
Dionysus: Much worth, but not worth telling you, it seems.”

Euripidés (-480–-406 BC) ancient Athenian playwright

Bacchae l. 472, as translated by Colin Teevan (2002)

F. H. Bradley photo

“The one self-knowledge worth having is to know one’s own mind.”

F. H. Bradley (1846–1924) British philosopher

No. 8.
Aphorisms (1930)

“They [laboratory groups] bypass such questions as how one comes to know that a problem exists, what it does to solution adequacy to be working on several different things concurrently with problem solving, what it's like to go about solving a felt, intuited problem rather than an explicitly stated consensually validated problem which was made visible to all members at a specific point in time.”

Karl E. Weick (1936) Organisational psychologist

Karl E. Weick (1971, p. 9), as cited in: Harry L. Davis. " Decision Making within the Household http://www.unternehmenssteuertag.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Redaktion/Seco@home/nachhaltiger_Energiekonsum/Literatur/entscheidungen_haushalte/Decision_Making_within_the_Household.pdf," The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 2, No. 4. (Mar., 1976), pp. 241-260.
1970s

Oscar Wilde photo

“The public have an insatiable curiosity to know everything, except what is worth knowing.”

Oscar Wilde (1854–1900) Irish writer and poet

Source: The Soul of Man Under Socialism, and Selected Critical Prose

Murray N. Rothbard photo

“The problem is that he originated nothing that was true, and that whatever he originated was wrong.”

On Adam Smith.
An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought (1995)

Related topics