Kaldibay K.K.

PhD Student of Philosophy, KazNPU named after Abai.

Abdrassilov T.K.

PhD Student of Philosophy, KazNU named after Al-Farabi.

Nurzhanov B.G.

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor, KazNU named after Al-Farabi.

The cultural role of religion in a secular society and security of human.

Today, we are usually pleased, note that the days when religion was considered a sign of backwardness and ignorance, spiritual blindness and obscurantism have passed. Came other times, but disputes and passions around religion and its role in modern society, the benefits or harm to humans, do not cease to this day. Arguably, at least for Kazakhstan, which passed the time when the religion after sunset communist ideology has been the subject of fashion and craze. Today everyone has a real right of freedom of choice of religion, not only the choice of a particular religion, but also to choose their religion. Many people today call themselves atheists, and are not afraid (or ashamed) of this. And that's OKThis question is closely linked to the question "What is religion?" Because I do not sort out the essence of religion, knowing only one point of view (eg, canonical theology or atheism), it is difficult to make the right choice, and even more difficult to recommend anything else. If we consider that religion in contemporary society closely associated with politics, national and ethnic issues, social life, science, art and culture, the question of the relation of the individual, and even more of a social group, public or cultural institution to religion ceases to be purely theoretical or personalOne of the major misconceptions we have inherited Marxism against religion, which is still shared by many atheists, is the comparison of religion with science, that is, the transformation of religion in the institution of knowledge and truth. Placed so the question about the essence of religion is not only immediately put religion in a disadvantageous position in relation to science, but also closes the path to understanding the more ancient and true role and nature of religion. Institute for Truth, starting with the modern times, according to a science, and no other social institution, no longer can claim to truth over her. In this perspective of religion, of course, look naive and implausible.But religion has never claimed to be the truth, at least for the truth in a scientific sense. If the word "truth" and is applicable in respect of religion, this truth does not sound proof, justification and argumentation, and the truth of revelation, a "miracle", contrary to the everyday rational or evidence. This truth is beyond reasonable understanding and does not require any evidence, evidence and arguments. Thus, in the Russian language, along with the scientific word "truth" is more expressive and everyday word "truth" that no longer meets the criteria of scientific truth. "The Truth" deals more with issues of social justice and life, than with "objective state of affairs." The question of when and why the word "truth" (or at least its scientific interpretation) is an essential term of the modern lexicon, would lead us far away from the stated theme. I can only refer to the works of Martin Heidegger, attach a lot of effort for the disclosure of the issue, and interpreted the Greek word aletheia (truth) is not so much as a compliance subject matter concepts, but rather as "unconcealment", "open", "phenomenon" of thought or object. In this sense it is closer to the religious concept of "revelation" than the scientific concept of "fit." But we emphasize more important - far more ancient religion of science (and her daughter - the truth), and measure its criteria of science is incorrect.So, the religion - not a scientific institution, it is much older than science and has a completely different nature, carries a very different social and cultural functions, than search for truth and the discovery of a new one.
The question of what religion is to this day one of the most complex and controversial issues of contemporary human knowledge, and it is unlikely in the near future will be set up such a theory, which will satisfy all needs and answer all outstanding questions. There are a myriad of various theories of the origin and essence of religion, each of which, in response to some questions, powerless before the close of others. Given the complexity of this issue, we would like to put it somewhat more pragmatic: what is the cultural role of religion in society, what cultural functions it performs? We believe that religion has always been an important cultural institution, and attempts to forcibly eradicate it, as shown, for example, the Soviet experience, leads to moral and spiritual degradation of society and humanA few words I would say about the concept and origin of "secularism". In science, this concept is called the "secularization of society." With hindsight it would seem that human society has always been divided into "secular" and "clerical" segments, ie, that the present division of powers between religion and politics is the norm of any human society, regardless of its historical period. In fact, secularism - it is a historical process, which occurs very late in the scale of world history. The process of secularization in fact began in the Renaissance (with the exception of sporadic manifestations of it in one way or another pre-historical era or culture, which has always had its own reasons), the causes of which - a special and controversial question. Prior to the Renaissance religion occupied a dominant position in society and played a role of the "basis" determines all other social institutions, which Marx assigned the economy. Since the beginning of the secularization of society religion is more and more displaced from a position of "basis" and becomes a subordinate social institution.

The first major function of religion - the consolidation of society. I could even say that it is not only the consolidation of the existing society, and the creation of human society as such, the transformation of the animal community in a purely human education. It should be clear that the latest scientific theories of religion, understood not simply as a belief in God, the Creator, or any supernatural force, but primarily as a ceremonial institution. The question of belief (or disbelief) is secondary and derived from the ritual practices. An understanding of religion as a belief in God justified only for human development. But for those distant times, in relation to which it is difficult to raise the issue of monotheism, the presence of faith, or even the presence of germs of mythology, the ability to think a man, etc., and where correct was only a matter of people or animals is, all modern criteria of religiosity quite good. Religion arises and develops as a ritual practice, as a set of rituals, a process that is both a process of formation of human society and human rights. As a ritual practice, it combines community of creatures in a team, united by common goals and objectives, directing social energy (often destructive) in the direction of creation, to achieve this goal. This function is preserved throughout the existence of religion, regardless of its specific content, or symbols of faith, including in modern forms of religion. Religion, as a rule, appeals to the supra-ethnic, supra, even super-social, and often human nature, deriving from the limited scope of its ethnic, social, gender and age hierarchy in the wider field of a common humanity. This was the case with Buddhism and Christianity, and Islam. "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus," writes the apostle Paul. (Gal. 3, 28). It may seem that Judaism is appealing only to "the Jews", separating themselves from other nations. But it is worth recalling the history of Judaism: it is formed during the tribal fragmentation of the ancient Hebrews, at a time when the Jewish oykumena was extremely limited in comparison with the period of early Christianity, and this oykumena was populated mostly enemies of the Jews (Babylonian, Egyptian captivity of the Hebrews). During this period, Judaism refers to "all the children of Abraham", regardless of their type, compartmentalized and competing with each other, so drevneiudeyskaya religion performs the same function as the consolidation of disparate tribes. Only when religion gets in the gravity field of politics, ie becomes dependent on the policy institute, religious problems of incompatibility and conflict on religious grounds.

Another important cultural function of religion - the formation and maintenance of the moral foundations of human coexistence. Every religion has always been inextricably linked with morality and spirituality. The question of the origin of morality as complex as it is a question of the origin of religion or culture. There are different concepts of the origin of morality, right up to the theories that is building its origins to the Renaissance. But if we take the basic moral norms of human life (up to the standards of human sacrifice and cannibalism), religion takes a direct part in the formation of these initial standards, ie "what is good" and "what is bad" for the community. Until the emergence of a "civilized society" (which is also a complex issue in the modern humanities) and its special social institutions involved in the elaboration and fixation of the social and moral norms (ethics, politics, law, philosophy, ideology), this function is performed exclusively religious. But even in developed "civilized societies" of the modern type of religion continues to perform this important function, if it does not forcibly excluded from this, as it was in Soviet society. What came of it can be seen every unbiased view - the expansion of manners, the occurrence of "double standards", demoralization and the nihilism of the Soviet people, etc. Communist ideology was never able to fully replace the function of religion in moral education But man does not live only for today and the short-term problems. Religion is a lot of time in the history of culture proved to be effective in the conservation and development of morality. For example, in the decaying Hellenistic society of the late Roman Empire was Christian in Europe acted as a force, which allowed to maintain and develop the moral foundation of human existence. The idea of one God, the Creator, the highest point in this-worldly human existence, God almighty and merciful at the same time, forgiving and self-sacrifice, who gave his own life for the salvation of mankind (along with other ideas of Christianity) allowed rescue Hellenistic society from sliding into barbarism, and not only to preserve but also to develop the human (as opposed to animals) base in man, to form a new meaning and purpose of human existence. Today, the Christian truths seem banal and abstract for the "enlightened mind", but should take into account the historical reality of the era: the centuries-old death of a powerful Roman Empire, the coming and the reign of the barbarians in Rome, almost universal illiteracy of the general population, the dominance of the cult of power and wealth, the absence of any meaningful social life meaning and orientation, etc. But man does not live only for today and the short-term problems. Religion is a lot of time in the history of culture proved to be effective in the conservation and development of morality. For example, in the decaying Hellenistic society of the late Roman Empire was Christian in Europe acted as a force, which allowed to maintain and develop the moral foundation of human existence. The idea of one God, the Creator, the highest point in this-worldly human existence, God almighty and merciful at the same time, forgiving and self-sacrifice, who gave his own life for the salvation of mankind (along with other ideas of Christianity) allowed rescue Hellenistic society from sliding into barbarism, and not only to preserve but also to develop the human (as opposed to animals) base in man, to form a new meaning and purpose of human existence. Today, the Christian truths seem banal and abstract for the "enlightened mind", but should take into account the historical reality of the era: the centuries-old death of a powerful Roman Empire, the coming and the reign of the barbarians in Rome, almost universal illiteracy of the general population, the dominance of the cult of power and wealth, the absence of any meaningful social life meaning and orientation, etc. All of this made up for early Christianity, in its own sense of filling an individual human existence by answering a series of dead-end, life meaning intractable issues, and forming a new social and moral ideals. A similar cultural function in several different historical conditions fulfilled Islam: for some two centuries, he not only created a powerful empire - Arab Caliphate, but most importantly has made virtually illiterate Arab society in the most enlightened and educated on the culture of those times. With regard to Buddhism, his "four truths" are still inscrutable wisdom to many of today's intellectuals. Modern life is the average person is unlikely to suffering, but for society formation epoch of Buddhism, it was probably a truism. But Buddhism is not just states that "life is suffering," and seeks to identify the causes of such a world order and builds a whole philosophical system that allows people to find harmony with the world and himself. His admiration for Buddhism expressed great Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges. While respecting the wisdom of Christianity, and Islam, and Judaism, he writes that a Christian can not remain a Christian, going to convert to Islam or Judaism, Muslim - Muslim, Christian or accepting another religion, Buddhist, may also be becoming a Buddhist and a Christian, and Muslim, and Jew, etc. For a Buddhist does not even matter (living) is in fact the Buddha, or his life - is a myth, a beautiful fiction, much more important than his doctrine and the "four noble truths."Religion also performs other important cultural functions, without which human life is almost hopeless, and existential absurdity. This soteriological function of salvation and hope. "Hope is alive person," says religious wisdom. Human communities in the long run is always based on the social activity of citizens, socially passive society is doomed to extinction. Sometimes, of course, and the destructive social activity, but this is more an anomaly than the norm. The activity is based on hope, belief in attainable goal, even if this goal is achieved by passively waiting and inaction. Modern rationalist actor, accustomed to live, "his mind" and to rely only on himself, the soteriological function of alien and poorly understood, but it is extremely important for the believer.

But perhaps the main cultural function, and cultural achievement of the Christian religion - is the "discovery of love." Love is not a charity, or even "the love of God," but as a new model of human relations, relieving many of the "accursed questions of culture." It is difficult to say whether there was a love as an ethical attitude to Christianity. Extant written sources cause to doubt this. While in the Old Testament is referred to as the love and the love of God and love of neighbor, it is not yet all-pervading power of the Creator, which it is in the New Testament. In Buddhism, as far as we know, love does not play any significant role. Even in highly developed Greek culture with its variety of forms of love is the main type of Eros - carnal cosmic force, and not a human relationship.Love preached by Jesus, is above all a human attitude, even in the form of love for God. Love here is identical to the faith - based on the Christian religion: to love means to believe, to believe it means to love. "Love me like ourselves," says Jesus. "Normal" human attitude, which is based on culture, it is "taking care of yourself" selfish love. Jesus begins to speak of love to another: "You shall love your neighbor", and it fundamentally changes the nature and basis of human relations. Love moves the focus from I to You, You're It gets expensive, even more expensive than the J. Loving is often sacrificed for the sake of a loved one. Love neutralizes anger, hatred, anger and other destructive emotions. Love is uneconomical, it is not subject to economic logic, pragmatism, self-interest, material interest, profits. Love makes a man generous, unselfish, lofty, romantic. Love and apolitical, it does not set the power relations of domination and subordination, and the relations of equality, willingness to submit to another. Love is irrational, it is not subject to rational logic, order and efficiency. Like the faith of Tertullian, it is "pure" form is possible only from the absurdity alogism, a miracle. Rationalized love becomes "selfish", selfish, materialistic, ie, "Mundane" and vulgarization. This is not a concept, a feeling that it precedes and predlezhit mind, as in Kant's aesthetics, and it is easy to destroy the mind, if you enter with him into conflict. The irrationality of love is not opposed to the negative dialectic of positivity of the mind, and the higher cosmic force, which is subject to the gods themselves, as in ancient Greek and Indian mythology. Generative, creative cosmic force, the mighty Eros, the father of all gods and men.
Love is an ideal project of human relations. Rationalism considers this project as utopian, unworkable, but Jesus insists that the very desire for love is a revolution in human relations. If it were possible to build a political, economic, ethical, legal relationship based on love, it would be the best of societies that ever existed on earth