Things I Don't Get, #3476
Dec. 15th, 2005 07:59 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thessalianMilitant or otherwise highly vocal atheists:
As I've said repeatedly, in this journal and elsewhere, I honestly don't give a shit if you believe in God, Allah, Buddha, the Great Old Ones or nothing at all. I'm not against atheists as a general rule; after all, they have faith in something, even if that 'something' constitutes a nothing, if you get me. But honestly, atheism is as big a leap of faith as any theistic belief because, really, you're still believing in something you can't prove: to wit, that there is no divine power that created / is watching over the universe. How do you prove a negative? You can say, "We have no proof that there is even one God, let alone several, therefore there must not be one", but that's not really very scientific at the end of the day because there is still stuff we can't explain in the universe and that hasn't really been ruled out as Act of Deity yet. Besides, technically we as a race don't have any proof that microscopic germs cause disease either; we're taking it on faith that the doctors know what they're talking about because we're not all medically schooled. Church parallel drawn here.
But the thing is, I can understand atheism as a position. What I don't get is people who so strongly defend a negative position. Atheism has gone hand-in-hand with scientific rationalism (and therefore 'superior' intelligence) for as long as I can remember, predominantly because the rampaging militant atheists I've known have claimed to have reached their conclusion from an entirely rational and scientific viewpoint; they have no proof that there is a God, they have not seen a God, therefore there is no God. I'm not seeing the rationale of that. It's sort of the adult equivalent of "There's no divine power in the universe because I say so." Or maybe it's just that I resent the fact that, in the eyes of that particular cross-section of humanity, my intelligence takes a nose-dive because I have religious beliefs. You know, it's not necessary to defend a belief that is apparently held with good logical reasons by undermining the intelligence of those with a different view by effectively calling them 'superstitious natives', just as it's not necessary to defend your One True Faith by undermining the humanity and goodness of those with a different view by deeming them hellbound for not sharing yours. I'm not sure which is worse, really -- militant Bible-bashers are tenacious little fuckers, but being dismissed as slightly dumber than I am just because I have faith is really harsh.
It's funny that, in any belief system, be it theistic or atheistic, it's the quiet ones who tend to make the strongest cases for their arguments; specifically, the ones who can intelligently talk about why they believe what they do but don't because they know that it's an individual, personal thing and also know how much they'd hate it if someone came in and shat all over their beliefs by advocating that theirs was the only way to live. It's the people who say, "Well, I can't say for sure what's out there but I've had experiences that really can't be described any other way without serious psychological gymnastics, therefore I believe that there is something, at least. This is how I'm comfortable expressing that faith." It's also the people who say, "Well, I suppose I can see that, but I personally haven't experienced anything that leads me to believe that there's any spiritual force in the universe at all, so I can't really believe in it. Still, if you have, and it makes you happy, go for it."
There's the crux of the matter. After all, with the exception of some of the more militant Christian sects or the so-called 'Muslims' who claim they perform acts of terrorism for Allah, what harm is there to an atheist in other people having faith? That's the bit I really don't understand. I even understand militant Christians to a point, as long as they're as kind as Jesus would have been about it -- they're afraid that all these people are condemned to an eternity of suffering if they don't accept Jesus into their hearts, and perhaps they feel it's their Christian duty to ensure that these good people don't go to hell. But why on earth would an atheist want to convert anybody? Honestly, if we're all just going to die and cease to exist as rational human beings anyway, does it matter if people want to dream of something more after death? If you have religion, what you do in life might make a difference to whatever comes after this life, in whatever way; if you don't, it doesn't matter. So why preach atheism beyond some smug self-righteous desire to be right?
I don't care what people worship, but it's nice to see the signs of it all the same -- if people would just shut the fuck up about this "war" to claim the winter festival, the entire holiday could be a Western world celebration of joy on whatever grounds people wanted rather than this commercial and religious bitch-fest. I like church architecture, and mosques, and Diwali lights, and sacrificing jelly beans to Cthulu, and I'm not hurting anyone by liking these things. I don't like most organised religion, and I don't like how people use it, but I do like the idea of faith. I have a fair bit of it myself, come to that. If you don't believe, good for you, but to me, that doesn't mean that you've proved that you can 'get by without some sort of spiritual crutch', or that you've somehow escaped a trap of irrationality. It just means your faith is different than mine. In the words of Andy Cairns, welcome to the church of noise.
As I've said repeatedly, in this journal and elsewhere, I honestly don't give a shit if you believe in God, Allah, Buddha, the Great Old Ones or nothing at all. I'm not against atheists as a general rule; after all, they have faith in something, even if that 'something' constitutes a nothing, if you get me. But honestly, atheism is as big a leap of faith as any theistic belief because, really, you're still believing in something you can't prove: to wit, that there is no divine power that created / is watching over the universe. How do you prove a negative? You can say, "We have no proof that there is even one God, let alone several, therefore there must not be one", but that's not really very scientific at the end of the day because there is still stuff we can't explain in the universe and that hasn't really been ruled out as Act of Deity yet. Besides, technically we as a race don't have any proof that microscopic germs cause disease either; we're taking it on faith that the doctors know what they're talking about because we're not all medically schooled. Church parallel drawn here.
But the thing is, I can understand atheism as a position. What I don't get is people who so strongly defend a negative position. Atheism has gone hand-in-hand with scientific rationalism (and therefore 'superior' intelligence) for as long as I can remember, predominantly because the rampaging militant atheists I've known have claimed to have reached their conclusion from an entirely rational and scientific viewpoint; they have no proof that there is a God, they have not seen a God, therefore there is no God. I'm not seeing the rationale of that. It's sort of the adult equivalent of "There's no divine power in the universe because I say so." Or maybe it's just that I resent the fact that, in the eyes of that particular cross-section of humanity, my intelligence takes a nose-dive because I have religious beliefs. You know, it's not necessary to defend a belief that is apparently held with good logical reasons by undermining the intelligence of those with a different view by effectively calling them 'superstitious natives', just as it's not necessary to defend your One True Faith by undermining the humanity and goodness of those with a different view by deeming them hellbound for not sharing yours. I'm not sure which is worse, really -- militant Bible-bashers are tenacious little fuckers, but being dismissed as slightly dumber than I am just because I have faith is really harsh.
It's funny that, in any belief system, be it theistic or atheistic, it's the quiet ones who tend to make the strongest cases for their arguments; specifically, the ones who can intelligently talk about why they believe what they do but don't because they know that it's an individual, personal thing and also know how much they'd hate it if someone came in and shat all over their beliefs by advocating that theirs was the only way to live. It's the people who say, "Well, I can't say for sure what's out there but I've had experiences that really can't be described any other way without serious psychological gymnastics, therefore I believe that there is something, at least. This is how I'm comfortable expressing that faith." It's also the people who say, "Well, I suppose I can see that, but I personally haven't experienced anything that leads me to believe that there's any spiritual force in the universe at all, so I can't really believe in it. Still, if you have, and it makes you happy, go for it."
There's the crux of the matter. After all, with the exception of some of the more militant Christian sects or the so-called 'Muslims' who claim they perform acts of terrorism for Allah, what harm is there to an atheist in other people having faith? That's the bit I really don't understand. I even understand militant Christians to a point, as long as they're as kind as Jesus would have been about it -- they're afraid that all these people are condemned to an eternity of suffering if they don't accept Jesus into their hearts, and perhaps they feel it's their Christian duty to ensure that these good people don't go to hell. But why on earth would an atheist want to convert anybody? Honestly, if we're all just going to die and cease to exist as rational human beings anyway, does it matter if people want to dream of something more after death? If you have religion, what you do in life might make a difference to whatever comes after this life, in whatever way; if you don't, it doesn't matter. So why preach atheism beyond some smug self-righteous desire to be right?
I don't care what people worship, but it's nice to see the signs of it all the same -- if people would just shut the fuck up about this "war" to claim the winter festival, the entire holiday could be a Western world celebration of joy on whatever grounds people wanted rather than this commercial and religious bitch-fest. I like church architecture, and mosques, and Diwali lights, and sacrificing jelly beans to Cthulu, and I'm not hurting anyone by liking these things. I don't like most organised religion, and I don't like how people use it, but I do like the idea of faith. I have a fair bit of it myself, come to that. If you don't believe, good for you, but to me, that doesn't mean that you've proved that you can 'get by without some sort of spiritual crutch', or that you've somehow escaped a trap of irrationality. It just means your faith is different than mine. In the words of Andy Cairns, welcome to the church of noise.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-12-15 01:50 pm (UTC)However I would agree that the whole of American culture (and many others including increasingly so British) is so steeped in fear they wouldn't know how to cope without an 'enemy'.
Have a read of the wikipedia entry Culture of Fear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_fear).