Wednesday, September 12, 2012

What Did He Do Wrong?

It's common for people to mock the spiritual beliefs of others. I am not a big believer in sky fairies, river gods or underground demons, so it's all to easy for me to fall into the trap of ridiculing the absurd beliefs of other people.

But in a tolerant society we allow people to hold whatever silly beliefs they want, so long as those beliefs aren't harmful to others. So, for example, people who won't get their kids immunised because they worry about the risk of autism, deserve to be ridiculed and shamed. Teachers and educationalists who disbelieve in evolution and think the Earth was created in six days have no place anywhere near a school science curriculum. Politicians who make policy based on what the Bible or Koran instructs should be hounded out of office.
But if a group of people want to believe that monsters live in our waterways, then let them.

Labour's leader David Shearer has been attacked this week for appearing to believe in taniwha. The attacks have come from the right after Patrick Gower broke a story about the content of Shearer's university thesis 25 years ago.
Labour Party leader David Shearer has long-held beliefs that taniwha must be respected when it comes to Maori and their interests in water. His views can be traced back to his master's thesis, and he stands by them today. 
Water has been the big political issue of the year, but when Mr Shearer was first asked who owned it he didn't know. 
But it turns out Mr Shearer has a degree of expertise on the issue - a master's thesis in fact. It was called Between Two Worlds, Maori Values and Environmental Decision-Making
In his thesis he advocated that "the belief in taniwha or spiritual pollution…while they may appear irrational to many…cannot simply be dismissed as irrelevant”. It’s a belief he still holds today.
Gower's story was leapt upon by opponents of Labour, who claimed it showed that Shearer either believes in taniwha, or at least thinks taniwha belief should be taken more seriously than it deserves. It is also being claimed that a double standard exists, because many on the left have mocked John Banks for his belief that the story of the Earth's creation in the Book of Genesis should be taken literally, while those people at the same time are now defending the rights of Maori to believe in taniwha.

In Banks' case some of the mockery possibly crossed the line, although I still personally find it troubling that a minster with responsibilities in a number of important policy areas (including education) is so ready to utterly ignore the obvious. What did he do when as mayor of Auckland he visited the museum and saw all those dinosaur bones? Close his eyes and pretend they weren't there? People are entitled to worry about the potential impact Banks' creationist beliefs might have on education policy.

In contrast, it's difficult to see how a belief in taniwha causes anyone any harm. There is a belief in talkback-land that Maori will say and do anything if it gets them compensation, and that all this talk of river monsters is just another way of extorting money from the government. That attitude belittles Maori beliefs, and borders on being racist. 

I haven't read Shearer's thesis (I'm not sure who in the media has, other than Gower), but Shearer doesn't appear to have said anything particularly controversial. Contrary to what some people have claimed, Shearer has not stated that he believes in taniwha. All he appears to have said is that Maori spiritual beliefs should be respected when environmental decisions are being made.

If this seems objectionable to some, then consider that we already structure much of our lives around Christian spiritual values, even those of us who don't believe in the Christian god. Deborah Russell explains:
...we pay a huge amount of respect to Christian beliefs. Christian leaders are invited to pray at our festivals, such as at Anzac Day ceremonies, we structure our work week around the Christian holy day (Sunday), we have public holidays for the two major Christian festivals of Christmas and Easter, our parliamentary sessions open with a prayer to the Christian god. If this is not respect for Christian beliefs, I don’t know what is.
So all David Shearer has done is demonstrate that he is a decent man who respects the spiritual beliefs of others, even if he doesn't share them. It doesn't seem particularly controversial that when planners make environmental decisions they should consult widely and take heed of the views of others. That includes Maori.

It's worrying though, that many supposedly-intelligent commentators cannot understand the difference between believing something is true, and respecting a person's right to believe something is true.

(See also Mickey Savage's post on this topic)

10 comments:

  1. I have had it put to me (I have no idea how true this is or not) that belief in taniwha isn't necessarily belief in an actual spiritual entity - rather it is almost a way of encoding knowledge about the land. i.e. you know the land around that area is boggy and not good for building, you put a taniwha there as a place marker almost. If this is in anyway true, then quite frankly, I think it's a superb idea.

    Of course, if I have got that completely wrong (possible) and it is a belief in an actual supernatural entity, then I have no problems thinking its silly.

    Respect is a tricky word though. I have no problem with people holding weird/mystical/religious/supernatural ideas about creation etc, as long as they don't sneak out and start affecting society as a whole. I can however, respect a persons right to hold an idea whilst having absolutely no respect for the idea itself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed. Per my post which Scott linked to:

      When it comes to many indigenous beliefs, I’ll take the view that if there is a legend or a belief about spirits, or monsters, or blessings, or whatever, then it may actually encode other important knowledge, such as hidden water currents, or seasons of the year, or degrees of genetic relationship that lead to appalling birth defects, or whatever. So there is good reason for the belief, even if the way that the reason is communicated can seem very odd to someone from a different cultural background.

      Delete
    2. Ah, I see. I hadn't followed the link. Looking at taniwha like that, they're a superb communication tool. Especially for a pre-literate society. And I don't see any problem with the continued use of that tool even after the development of other tools.

      Delete
  2. @Ben

    I have also read literature that has said that it is believed that the belief in Taniwha has its origins in early Polynesian migration, particularly through Melanesia, where explorers would have witnessed large snakes and other such creatures and as it was passed down in lore it became the mythical Taniwha

    ReplyDelete
  3. Patrick Gower acting as a shill for the National party research unit? Colour me surprised!

    ReplyDelete

  4. I'd expect different Maori to have different ideas of what 'taniwha' means to them, just like different Christians ahave different ideas on what 'God' means to them.

    This looks like a major beat-up on a par with Santuary trying to blame it on Nationa. There's a possibility Shearer could have changed his views over 25 years - I hope he has. But his thesis comment seems reasonable to me anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "What did he do when as mayor of Auckland he visited the museum and saw all those dinosaur bones? Close his eyes and pretend they weren't there?"

    Why would he do that?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I left a comment expressing my concern that a newsreader has such poor reading comprehension. I doubt it will be published after moderation though.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It seems daft to me that some believe in the Creation being a few thousand years ago. Those same people believe that God put those dinosaur bones there in the ground as part of his plan. But like others it seems disturbing that Mr Banks believes in the literal Creation while developing the optional Schools design for NZ kids.
    As far as Creation or Taniwhas or UFOs are concerned they are items of Faith and good luck to those who believe but just leave me out of the consequences of those beliefs.
    I like Mr Shearer's stance re Taniwha. Me too.

    ReplyDelete
  8. At the risk of channeling "Life of Brian", there is actually an important difference between respecting a belief, and respecting a right (a freedom) to hold a belief.

    I think some Catholic teaching is twaddle. I don't respect the official (albeit widely ignored) doctrine on Papal infallibility, for example.

    But if the Protestant Party wants to close down the Catholic church, I'll join the priests on the barricades (well, in spirit at least). Ditto for synagogues and mosques and anywhere else where they believe in a God, but I don't.

    Do taniwha exist? No. Do I respect people's belief in taniwha? No. Do people have the right to believe in them? Yes. Do we need to understand why people believe in them? Yes.

    All four questions are clearly distinct.

    ReplyDelete

I welcome comments, but I ask commenters to follow a few simple rules:

1. I delete anonymous comments. Please use either a name or moniker. I am not asking anyone to reveal their secret identity. Just don't call yourself "Anonymous".
2. Please don't abuse or defame others.
3. Moronic or nonsensical comments may be deleted.
4. I don't often exercise the heavy hand of censorship, but I do reserve the right to delete any comment I don't like, for any reason.