Rant I'd written a while back.

Dommo

On Mac's double secret probation.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
1,917
Reaction score
203
Location
Oklahoma City, OK
I wrote this on a forum a while back, and when I reread it after so long, I figured it was one of my better pieces of writing that reflects well on my viewpoints pertaining to religion. Take note that this is pretty much a rant, but I still think along these lines. I think if anything the "anger" of the writing was more or less due to the frustration I had with a member of that particular board, as all he would do was quote the bible. It was like the guy couldn't independently think for himself. Anyway, without further ado here's the post.

"The Post"

I think the fundamental problem is that for many people, they need to have some concept that there is a "Reason" for things happening in the world. They want to know "Why" we are here, are what our purpose is. "Why" did grandpa have to die, "Why" do evil things happen, "What" happens after we die?

As far as I'm concerned, these questions are completely irrelevant. Someone once asked me after a friend of mine was killed in a car accident, why they had to die. I simply replied that probability dictated that some poor person's time was up.

I mean statistically speaking, all of us will die. It's just a matter of when, and how(shit even if you could be truly immortal, at some point entropy dictates the breakdown of the universe, by the second law of thermodynamics). Reasons have nothing to do with it. Choices do.

Nature is not driven by some sort of "moral" force, but it simply follows a set of rules as defined by physics, and from there we make our choices. Do I have enough time to pull out in this intersection before the oncoming car approaches? Did I see said car? It's situations like these that largely dictate what the odds of our continuing existence are. You make better choices in life, and in the long haul, your prospects of a long life are improved, BUT they are not guaranteed. Chance is always a factor, and on any given day anyone of us, could make that critical error and thus end our existence.

My thoughts are the same with the aspects on the afterlife. People want to believe that death is not the be-all end all, but I figure it is, or at least I'm assuming it is(I really want to die, and end up in an awesome orgy for all of eternity, but seriously I'm not holding my breath). Honestly, I figure if people lived with the outlook that this existence was the only one they'd ever have, then I'm certain many things we experience such as wars, violence, etc, would not happen with the frequency that they do now. I live as though this is my last day, and as frightening as non-existence can be for a lot of people, I look at death as being a required process for the continuance of all life. If people didn't think that they'd get 72 virgins upon dying, then I'm quite sure that they'd be as willing to die for a cause.

Thirdly, I would not be against religion, if it was legislated that religions were not allowed to actively try to convert young people. People need to decide for themselves on the subject of spirituality, not be brainwashed as children into believing something. Deciding on one's outlook on life should be something that is an act of self-discovery, not one that is forced down the throats of children.

Lastly, as far as atheism is concerned, the fundamental logical flaw is in it's ignoring of a possible albeit infinitely unlikely higher power(or really the assumption of any absolute truth outside of mathematics). Even though it goes against my every instinct with my scientific understanding of physics, it is never the less possible. However, my view is that until a higher power shows itself(as in PROVES its existence conclusively) then my practical views align closely with atheism.

The problem comes down to faith, which is what I find to be illogical. Faith essentially requires the invalidation of rationality, which is why I find atheism flawed, because to disprove the existence of anything, you need to have proof. Without proof you have faith. With faith you have a religion.
 

Ruv Draba

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
5,114
Reaction score
1,322
I think that the occasional rant is good for the atheistic 'soul'. The torrent of theistic beliefs in which we swim can create a cognitive dissonance that can make one want to yell and froth at times. A forum like this can be a good place in which to do it.

Perhaps unlike some posters here, I don't care how much anger I see in a post. I'm interested in the ideas and the wit in expression. As long as we don't insult participants, I'm very relaxed.

On to some of Dommo's key ideas:

Making meaning out of the physical world: This seems to be a huge and key difference between theists and atheists. Theists want to believe that intrinsic meaning can be found in the physical world; atheists hold that it's not necessarily there.

My personal view is that we're free to create whatever meaning we like in what we see -- or choose to see no meaning at all. History and archaeology show that natural events are quite indifferent to morality. Psychology tells us that the people who are most disposed to find deep metaphysical meaning in small physical events are actually dysfunctional psychotics. (A friend of our family suffers from this disorder - he sees divine messages in random events, and unfortunately the messages often tell him to do dangerous or illegal things.) We are all of us capable of imagining meaning in the mundane (as writers, it's a lucrative skill), but that doesn't make it real or reliable.

Life after death: As a species we're strongly geared toward self preservation and reproductive preservation. We are hardly dispassionate about the prospect of our own deaths and so it's very unlikely that our views on life after our deaths are unbiased. On the other hand, if you want to argue that life continues after the demise of the organism then it makes sense to start with the idea that it happens for all living organisms, and not just the ones that happen to most resemble ourselves.

But the mythology about life after death is very complicated. People don't just hold that life continues after death but also that:
  • It continues someplace else
    (er... why? Why not here?)
  • The living can't reach that place.
    (er... why? Life either is or isn't life. Which way do you want it?)
  • The dead can't "come back".
    (Well if that's true, then who's providing all this information about how things are after you die?)
  • The dead can however watch us.
    (Are you comfy about your dead grandma seeing you in the shower? )
  • The dead are ageless, and often restored to "original" physical health.
    (Wait a minute... what happens to congenitally deformed people who've had corrective surgery? What age brain do I get? What happens to children and babies who die? Or teenagers? Do they remain eternally pubescent? Is that fair?)
  • The good get to hang out in a 'good' place and all get on.
    (Ha ha! The 'good' couldn't get on in life. Why should they change?)
  • The bad get to exist in a 'bad' place and suffer a lot.
    (Don't even get me started on this one!)
Religion and evangelism: I have no idea how one could legislate against evangelism without legislating against religion itself. We live in a world of advertising; advertising is emotional and manipulative. Religious advertising shares those characteristics. At best maybe one could have 'evangelism free zones', as one has 'smoke free zones'. Some discussion forums have exactly that sort of rule. I tend to treat my home and workplace that way too.

Atheism and faith: It's impossible to function in this world without faith. A child places its faith in its parents. Every time you catch a cab, you place your faith in the driver. Go to a dentist and you let some stranger poke in your mouth. We all swim in faith. I don't believe that faith is the issue here. That's just a term that theists have chosen to dignify what they do. If we're silly enough to use that term then we're hoist with our own petard before we start.

Atheism and bias:
Really, I think that the issue is not faith but bias - the practice of ignoring some evidence while placing great weight on other. Many atheists I know endeavour to remove bias. Many theists endeavour to preserve it - even to the point of fabricating evidence, or skewing or recasting independent testing.

We all have bias in corners of our mind, but we don't have to leave it unchallenged. Preserving bias is not just illogical; it's ignorant and downright deceitful. Really, if there's any core benefit to atheism at all it's that it lets us strive to remove our biases rather than entrench them.
 

Dommo

On Mac's double secret probation.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
1,917
Reaction score
203
Location
Oklahoma City, OK
You have to remember this post was made more or less out of frustration more than anything else.

But I do agree with you on the faith thing, to an extent.

I think one of the primary ideas I have, is that(at least in my case) I tend to run by statistical likelihoods(which are all subjective of course). I base my decisions upon what I know at a given time, and I try to shoot for the best outcome. However, I also understand that because I don't know everything, that at best my decision is only going to be a good guess. What I do attempt though, is to stack the deck as much as possible in my favor.

I might stack the deck by doing things like not drinking for example. I know that if I drink, my ability to think rationally is impaired. Thus, if I'm put in a situation where rational thought might be important, it'd be a good idea not to be drunk when making such a decision(for example walking into a tatoo parlor).

I guess the easiest way to describe this, is like life being a game of russian roulette. The more good decisions you make, the more chambers in the cylinder are added to the revolver. Every time you do something, you spin the cylinder on the revolver and pull the trigger. Most of the time the metaphysical gun will just make a "click" noise, but on occasion you'll shoot yourself. Most of the time this might not even be that big of a deal(ever stub a toe, or break a glass), however this could also cause your death. In fact it might not even be a specific instance the kills you, but a combination of several that do you in. I look at it in a way that good decisions can outweigh the bad, but that a bad mistake can potentially cost you everything(I could be a saint, but if I didn't look both ways on the street and got plowed by a bus, I don't think I'm gonna walk away).

Meh, I'm just rambling now, but I'm trying to clarify somethings that I felt I just kind of breezed over.