Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon book club questions

1. 1.

   Dennett says that studying religion scientifically is not inherently disrespectful. Do you agree? Where does the line fall between analysis and desecration?

2. 2.

   He argues that the persistence of religion is better explained by evolution and cognitive bias than by truth. Does an explanation of why we believe something affect whether we think the belief is justified?

3. 3.

   What is a genuine benefit religion has provided in your community or family? Does identifying that benefit require accepting any theological claim?

4. 4.

   Dennett proposes that children should receive a neutral education about world religions before any religious initiation. Is that feasible, and is it actually neutral?

5. 5.

   He distinguishes folk religion from doctrinal religion. Which of those does he actually engage with, and which should he engage with more?

6. 6.

   The meme framework suggests religions spread because they are good at spreading, not because they are true. Does that frame feel illuminating or reductive to you?

7. 7.

   If the community and comfort functions of religion could be provided by secular institutions, would that weaken the case for religion? Why or why not?

8. 8.

   Dennett says religious moderates provide cover for extremists by making faith itself culturally untouchable. Do you find that argument persuasive?

9. 9.

   How does Dennett's treatment of religion compare to how he'd want evolution or climate science to be treated? Is the comparison apt?

10. 10.

    What would it mean for a religious institution to meet the transparency standards Dennett thinks are appropriate? Which institutions already come close?

11. 11.

    He worries about stealth religion in public policy. Can you identify a recent example where religious assumptions shaped a secular-seeming debate?

12. 12.

    Is there anything Breaking the Spell cannot explain about religion? What would a refutation of his framework need to show?

How to run the discussion

• Pick six to eight, not all of them. An hour of real discussion covers fewer questions than anyone expects, and racing the list is what makes a book club feel like homework.
• Open with what people noticed, not what they concluded. Asking for a verdict first hardens opinions before anyone has heard each other.
• Let the disagreement run. The questions below that split a room are the ones worth the time; the ones everyone answers the same way can be skipped.
• Ask the quiet person a specific question. A direct, narrow question is far easier to answer than an open invitation to contribute.