Wow. That's all I can say. Reading a review of Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion on amazon I was stunned by the harshness of the words of one particular reviewer, whose screen name is actually "Mellow Mel". Interesting. So what brought Mellow Mel into such an eloquent fury? Something as simple as - Atheism.
Mel states that... atheists come across as a curious breed. They place themselves firmly within the animal kingdom so by definition are non-human. They have no future except death. They believe life appeared by chance so they serve no practical purpose. They have no real concept of love, which is reduced a chemical/hormonal response in the body to encourage mating and family building. They have no accountability to a higher authority and therefore possess no moral or ethical obligations. Justice and a sense of right and wrong have no material foundations. Neither is there any responsibility to feel compassion as it conflicts with Darwin's `survival of the fittest' law. `Free thinkers' is how they describe themselves but abuse is meted out to anyone who doesn't think their way.
I beg to differ, as the attentive reader might have anticipated. Although I have recently discussed with my sociology studying friend how people abhor labelling themselves in this fluid, changing time, I am going to dare. Not a thoroughbred (yet), I do consider myself to be bordering on atheism. I do not believe in God, I do not believe in a greater purpose, I do not believe in punishment for our sins (other than what our conscience metes out). However, what I do believe in is the good in people. I needn't have that linked to a deity for it to be important and true to me.
For me, having a god in the picture confuses things. It's not about "God". It's about being a decent person that can be proud of her actions at the end of the day, at the end of life. It's about doing as well as possible, about creating a better place for all of us. Why do we need a god meddled into that? He doesn't live it, doesn't feel the shame of acting dishonestly ('cause he's never tried it you see...).
I haven't figured it out just yet. But my belief is based on the idea of individual growth and realisation as a means to improving the condition of the world. Big words, I know.
It's really late and I feel that there are so many more things to say about this. But it'll have to wait. I need sleep. More later, I promise. Perhaps when I have read the book.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
aah, interesting topic.
how do we define god, really? is there one true definition that can be used and applied to everybody?
maybe by seeking to understand human nature and by actually believing that the human race are capable of great things (as history has proven), the atheist will in the end become closer to god (without intention to do so) than those who claimed that they're religious.
this is of course related closely to how we understand the concept of god. which of course differs from one person to another.
the bane of religion is the tendency of its people to use it as a crutch.
p/s: i think i should stop writing using my real name, otherwise the next thing you know is i'd get death threats from bigots and zealots (who are extremists and not fundamentalists).
=D
p/s: i think i should stop writing using my real name, otherwise the next thing you know is i'd get death threats from bigots and zealots (who are extremists and not fundamentalists).
Heh heh heh, makes me think of these old stories where using some one's real name gives you power over them.
MLJ
I'm an agnostic, plain and simple. I don't know if there is a God or higher purpose. Its never been proven or disproven so how can an honest person ever be anything but an agnostic?
Its tragicomical that so many people believe that beleif is enough.
hmm, interesting. never really considered the term agnostic.. maybe I whould look into it before I declare myself one thing or the other :.)
I'm wondering if an atheist can actually come "closer to god", as you say Nurul.. isn't this in it self an oxymoron? You only bring god into the picture because you are a believer in him. Perhaps an atheist wo becomes enlightened will come closer to some ultimate truth which is NOT = god.
I guess one can be something other than a dis-believer if one is convinced that there is something to believe in. In our society there is such a strong tendency to only believe what we see and feel or only what is proven through scientifically ordained methods.
My father, the mathematician, believes only in what can be proven. Is this perhaps also a religion - that of scientifics?
All I'm saying Moif, is that what you do believe in (and here I am purposely proposing that we all believe in SOMETHING) will in the end be based upon something - your cultural upbringing, truths learned from reading books, studying the grass or from seeing your beautiful daughter grow up.
Well, I have a sneaking suspicion that all belief is actually denial. That we are simply animals who have evolved to the point where we too successful and as a consequence we are now destroying ourselves by depleting the environment that sustains us. I reach this reasoning by noting that where ever there is faith there is destruction. Wars follow religion like flea’s on rat’s and the more ‘faith’ people have, the more blind they are to the world around them. I read the other day that Egypt is growing at a rate of 1.2 million people per year. Given that through out history, Egypt has always been a place where sustainability was a key word, I think it’s very significant that today, it is a country in rapid population growth. One hundred years ago the populations of Denmark and Egypt were identical, approx 5 million people. Today Denmark is some where around 5.5 million and Egypt is said to be approaching 100 million. What is fuelling/sustaining that population growth? Technology? Faith? Stupidity?
Jared Diamond has written a good book about how how populations/socities choose to survive or destroy themselves. His observation is that when ever a population goes into rapid expansion and quickly depletes its natural resources then it dissolves into war and collapses. I’d recommend it if you weren’t already so busy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse:_How_Societies_Choose_to_Fail_or_Succeed
My take on Diamonds thesis is that belief, or ‘faith’ as its called, is a system where by humanity falls into a mental trap. I see it as kind of like an addict who cannot accept the truth about his addiction and thus continues to take his drugs, escalating ever further, getting more and more strung out until the eventual collapse. The question is only how far can you go before your faith destroys you.
There is a philosophy, I think it may be Buddhist, that says human beings are fundamentally ignorant. I agree with this. People think education is the key to success, but it isn’t. Education can liberate your mind, but in doing so it can also reveal to you the depth of your ignorance. For the most part though, I think most ‘educated people’ never comprehend their own ignorance. I know I’ve met very few intelligent people who understood the value of humility.
Some people tell me they are not afraid to die and I wonder. Is that because you hold life to be of little value, or because you just never think about dying? I know I’m scared of death, my psychologist told me so. I’ve looked at the idea of God and it came to me that even if there is a God, then I’m still scared of dying because life is so good that I don’t want to leave it and know I’ve left, butthen again, I’m scared because I believe that if I’m not aware I’m dead and I never will be, then this fear is actually me mourning my own death in advance.
I think its from this basic understanding of life’s eventual end that faith is born to create a barrier between us and that mourning.
And now I’m depressed. I should know better than to contemplate this sort of thing at 2 am. No doubt, faith is denial because denial is a survival mechanism. One we agnostics have to do without!
Moif,
I’m sorry to have spurred you on to think about things that depress you. I guess the reason why I consider these things is because to me they’re new whereas it appears you have dealt with them more than once!
This book by Diamond sounds interesting, but as you’ve already noted, my schedule doesn’t allow for too many extracurricular activities these days. It will, however, go onto my “I-want-to-read-that-some-day”-list!
I understand your fear of dying – hell, I’m scared as well, even though I would probably fit into the category of people that don’t think about it. Perhaps it’s just a way of rhetoric, but it appears to me that there are some things that you believe in. As I wrote in my last post, to me you needn’t believe in a god to have a belief that guides you in your life. You enjoy life so much that you don’t want to die. So what is it then that you are enjoying? THAT is what you believe in. (And now I’m guessing:) Love, compassion, nearness of your loved ones, exhibition of the good in mankind, the ability to dream, create things of beauty, the changes of the season, acquiring new knowledge… To me, that’s the important stuff. That’s what I believe in. And that’s what makes me not want to die.
I guess I always try to find the positive in what I’m dealing with.
Perhaps this excludes me from being an agnostic…? :.)
Of course not.
You're an urban designer.
So, you are playing god =D
Remember our discussion near Mahatma about how you feel as designer it is important that you show the hand that draw the lines?
And I said that it's up to the designer, if his objective is to make things look like they happen organically, then that's his challenge as a designer. Honestly speaking, it is actually tougher to hide your hands, as a designer I mean. Gotta be a genius to achieve that.
There are many paths to know the designer. Either you take a long hard look at what's there around you and then come to the realization (or not), or simply by believing what you've been told.
A lot of people choose to just believe what's been told. It's easier and it's a good crutch. So, believing for the wrong reasons is not good too.
To believe for the right reasons, now that's tough.
Then of course, what are the right reasons?
The answer might be 42 but are we asking the right question?
=)
MLJ
Not all agnostics are as pessimistic as I am! To be agnostic is just to accept that you don't have the answers (except 42)
=)
N, I never said that it was more or less difficult to hide the designer's hand... what I was talking about was the honesty that goes with being truthful about who has done what, and the consequences of it. In our project at uni, this truthfulness to me means not hiding the designing hand.
But on to your real topic, or rather what I assume you intended.
Believing for the "right reasons".
Asking the right questions.. I guess the right question is up to each and every one of us to define, just as is the choice to believe (in the answer) or not.
Moif, "To be agnostic is just to accept that you don't have the answers (except 42)"
...does it exclude having some of the answers? :.)
Generally speaking I take much joy in not knowing the answers to a lot of things in that this allows me to continuously explore and examine everything!
Post a Comment