Recently, a Christian friend of mine who is a college graduate made
comments undermining evolutionists and subsequently the vast majority of the
scientific community. Now, I'm not against religion and I have no intentions of
attacking the institution or its followers. However, I am an advocate of
critical thinking. In the case of my friend, I could care less if he wants to
believe in a certain religion because it doesn't really have a bearing on how I
live my life and carry out my own beliefs. Still, it frustrates me deeply to
see someone who has acquired enough education to graduate from a four year
college and yet is so entrenched with religious dogma that he feels the need to
make public comments claiming that it is a mistake for humankind to believe in
so-called nonsense that is transmitted in science classes around the globe
regarding the origins of human existence. This kind of thinking hinders the
positive progression of society and it prevents the healthy cultivation of new
ideological stances concerning the meaning of life, what it is to be human, and
what the universe is all about.
One thing that really annoys me is when a religious zealot has the
audacity to call atheists "arrogant", as though it is out of pure
arrogance that atheists choose to be atheists (because we just can't handle the
idea of submitting to a higher power, you know, even though we must do it every
day of our lives since we are stuck being human). I find that it makes more
sense to claim arrogance on the one who thinks that us humans are somehow more
than human and have been specially put here on this earth by some almighty, all
knowing, perfectly moral being to fulfill some purpose which has been dictated
by that being, which will lead us to a beautiful supernatural afterlife, during
which we will exist happily for eternity. Why should we think we are so
important that we must continue to exist when we die, or that we must fulfill
the will of something we call God? Why should we think our existence means
anything at all? Isn't it less arrogant to believe we are nothing but a speck
of star dust, a speck that happened to thrive long enough as a species to
develop a brain that allows it to be conscious of its own existence, a speck
that will soon die and forever be nothing to the universe? Isn't it less
arrogant to believe that we're nothing rather than something that must live on
and serve any purpose at all? Christians have it backwards, so, so backwards.
When I saw an educated man give a lecture a couple of years ago on campus about why Darwin was wrong, a lecture in which a completely [complicated] scientific approach was taken to demonstrate the view that evolution is a bad theory, a question was raised which went something like, "Why should we trust your science and the conclusions you have drawn, as opposed to everything that 99% of the scientific community has brought forward which supports the theory of evolution?". The man did not have an answer, and the question had to be asked again, and again. Finally, he went for the only thing he could and started saying that the issue really came down to the atheistic community conspiring against Christianity. Hogwash. How can he believe, or expect anyone else to believe, that the main reason the vast majority of scientists around the world support the theory of evolution is that they are all somehow working together to bring down Christianity? This is so monstrously insulting to the scientific community it is sickening. A main facet of science is to be as objective as possible, and my guess is that many scientists who now believe in evolution were actually religious at some time (and maybe still are in some way), and did not go into the field with a pre-existing drive to dismantle Christianity. It just so happened that as time went on, observations and experimental data did not match up with what was held to be true according to the Bible and such. I didn't really realize it at the time of the lecture, but I realize it now that there is no reason to trust the science brought forward by creation scientists, and that it seems much more likely that it is they who uphold scientific theories founded on internal religious bias, whether they know it or not.
I don't care if Christians want to hold certain beliefs, because I believe in having the freedom to believe in what one chooses to believe in, based on his or her own personal judgments. However, I do not like being ridiculed and given a guilt trip by being told that I am arrogant, outright wrong, and misguided for rejecting the Christian worldview and believing that as a human, I am no more important than the amoebas and the worms, I'm not going to continue to exist somehow after I die, and that it need not take a great intelligent being for the universe to come into existence. I'm not saying that I know all of the answers. Obviously there are gaps in our knowledge concerning the origins of life and the origin of space and time altogether (and I'm thinking there are a lot of things we just are not capable of knowing at all), but I think the phenomenal world speaks for itself when it comes to whether or not the Christian worldview is closer to the truth than my current worldview. So to the Christian out there who belittles others by telling them that their non-Christian views are a product of arrogance and mistake, please reflect on your own beliefs and their origins before you do this; you might find that it is you who has been arrogant and mistaken all of this time.
When I saw an educated man give a lecture a couple of years ago on campus about why Darwin was wrong, a lecture in which a completely [complicated] scientific approach was taken to demonstrate the view that evolution is a bad theory, a question was raised which went something like, "Why should we trust your science and the conclusions you have drawn, as opposed to everything that 99% of the scientific community has brought forward which supports the theory of evolution?". The man did not have an answer, and the question had to be asked again, and again. Finally, he went for the only thing he could and started saying that the issue really came down to the atheistic community conspiring against Christianity. Hogwash. How can he believe, or expect anyone else to believe, that the main reason the vast majority of scientists around the world support the theory of evolution is that they are all somehow working together to bring down Christianity? This is so monstrously insulting to the scientific community it is sickening. A main facet of science is to be as objective as possible, and my guess is that many scientists who now believe in evolution were actually religious at some time (and maybe still are in some way), and did not go into the field with a pre-existing drive to dismantle Christianity. It just so happened that as time went on, observations and experimental data did not match up with what was held to be true according to the Bible and such. I didn't really realize it at the time of the lecture, but I realize it now that there is no reason to trust the science brought forward by creation scientists, and that it seems much more likely that it is they who uphold scientific theories founded on internal religious bias, whether they know it or not.
I don't care if Christians want to hold certain beliefs, because I believe in having the freedom to believe in what one chooses to believe in, based on his or her own personal judgments. However, I do not like being ridiculed and given a guilt trip by being told that I am arrogant, outright wrong, and misguided for rejecting the Christian worldview and believing that as a human, I am no more important than the amoebas and the worms, I'm not going to continue to exist somehow after I die, and that it need not take a great intelligent being for the universe to come into existence. I'm not saying that I know all of the answers. Obviously there are gaps in our knowledge concerning the origins of life and the origin of space and time altogether (and I'm thinking there are a lot of things we just are not capable of knowing at all), but I think the phenomenal world speaks for itself when it comes to whether or not the Christian worldview is closer to the truth than my current worldview. So to the Christian out there who belittles others by telling them that their non-Christian views are a product of arrogance and mistake, please reflect on your own beliefs and their origins before you do this; you might find that it is you who has been arrogant and mistaken all of this time.
When you don't know the truth about Christianity, this sounds like a typical response.
ReplyDeleteHuh? Explain then what the truth about Christianity is. If by "typical response" you mean a response that is respectful, honest, and reasonable, then so be it. What I see in Christianity is a belief system that is designed in such a way that it shall not be denied no matter what, and the system is actually strengthened by the lack of reason behind it. It is a belief system that embeds ideas into the human consciousness to artificially establish one's entire being, so much to the point that there is no being without it. So much that to step foot outside of this belief system is to deny personhood, consciousness, existence, purpose, and any and all human significance. Thus, regardless of what outside communities try to say concerning the falsehood of many Christian beliefs, Christians hold onto them all, so tightly, because they believe there is no truth outside of Christianity, and to deny Christianity is to deny life itself. This denial is unacceptable for many, and is impossible to handle, because to fall away from Christianity is to fall into a treacherous void of damnation, a place where your brain can't handle its own thoughts, where a black hole forms in one's heart never to let out any light of life, love or happiness, leaving nothing behind but emptiness, hopelessless, and inescapable terror. But for the rest, we wake up from the nightmare, we're enlightened, we realize ourselves, and we establish what is important, and we recognize that we establish it, and we become more and more true to ourselves. You're either a troll or someone who does not want to honestly discuss anything regarding what was written in this post. Otherwise you would have said a lot more.
DeleteThe truth of Christianity is that Jesus is lord and savior.
ReplyDeleteFor all the arrogance you accuse me as a Christian as having, you sure have an ironic way of showing it. You seem to be pretty high and mighty on what you think is true. Look in the mirror lately?
Ok, so without Jesus as our savior, we're all damned for eternity, right? There's a lot of problems with this. If Jesus saved us all, why does it matter whether we believe it or not? We should all be saved then regardless. I may seem high and mighty on what I think is true about Christianity, but it's my opinion. It really pisses me off to interact with Christians who like to belittle and put down people who don't accept the Christian worldview. Looking around, it makes a lot more sense for me to believe the Christian worldview is a lot less accurate than my worldview. What would you say, if hypothetically, you found out for certain that there is no heaven or hell or the savior? What if you found out that it was all a myth? Most Christians could not accept that, nor could they accept anything that shows other parts of the Bible are incorrect or inaccurate. In my opinion, Christians are more arrogant because they will smash down others' beliefs because they think they are the only ones who could possibly have it right no matter what and could never be wrong, and that what they believe is such absolute truth, it surpasses any form of logic or reasoning. Sure, I could be wrong and there really could be a Jesus savior and everything, but I favor being reasonable and thinking critically about it all, and I find it completely unreasonable for me to believe that, and I'm not going to be so naive as to fall into the trap of "well, it can't be proven with reason, that's the point, you just have to have faith, now believe it".
DeleteThis is seriously the pot calling the kettle black. You demonstrate the same arrogance you accused Christians of. How are we supposed to take this argument seriously when you sound like such a fool?
ReplyDeleteWell I guess you don't have to have an argument of any kind at all to prove that you're the one who has it right then. You just say that I'm being arrogant the same way I see Christians as being arrogant a lot of times, which isn't really saying anything at all anyway.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean, 6:51?????????????????????
ReplyDeleteWho gives you the right to say you are right? You say that I am being arrogant for what I believe but you are doing the same by being arrogant in what you believe. Why do I need to answer you? I think you are blind not only to the truth but to yourself not being open to the truth.
Live and let live! Soon, we will all be the culinary delights of celestial creatures.
ReplyDeleteI never said I was right 10:36 (it is you who is making absolute truth claims here), I'm saying you obviously think YOU'RE right when there is a crapload of evidence that practically disproves what you think to be absolutely true, and instead of investigating that evidence and looking deeper into the fact that you COULD be wrong, you're like most Christians who bury their heads in the sand on account of wanting to be saved. And many Christians will mock people who don't follow in their footsteps, and call out arrogance on the part of those who are REALLY being true to themselves by reflecting big time and saying, "Gee, why do I believe what I believe? Does it make sense for me to believe this? Do I have to believe this to live my life? Is there a reason to think that we have an afterlife?" and so on and so forth. To me, it is more arrogant for the Christian to think humans have anything to be saved in the first place and yet remain willfully ignorant to what is probably a more accurate view of the world. Maybe their poor hearts couldn't take it if they found out they were misguided, and all this time there was no heaven, no eternal happiness, no soul, no damnation for the wicked, none of that. Christians never provide a sound argument for what they believe. There's no reason to it. I might as well get a team of writers together from all over the world and have them work on a single book to be published, all about Mr. Blue, the invisible alien who lives on the moon and controls all of the televisions and cell phones on Earth. And the reason to believe this is because... well there is no reason! I mean, don't we know that it is humans on earth who control those things? Sure we do, but some children out there might still believe it, you know, children who are ignorant, like the entire human race was at the time the Bible was written. No one can even reason with Christians because Christians know they don't have to provide any reason for what they believe, which is the beauty of Christianity I guess. Sigh. I would expect a response, but you probably think this entire thing I wrote is me being arrogant, and you will hang up on that in order to avoid actually making an argument of some sort.
ReplyDeleteAs a Christian and an advocate of crittical thinking I feel a need to humble you. The argument of 7:00 am is flawed. You claimed that the bible was written in a time when the entire human race was ignorant. You do really think that in another 2000 years people will look back on this time and say wow those people were smart. No, there will be paradigm shifts like there has always been with the sciences. So your beloved sciencetific theories will probably change. None the less we work with the knowledge we have and make the best choices with that information. I could argue my faith, but I think the only person to convince is myself. I've taken the philosophy classes and been down the rabbit hole and back. You probably don't like that answer but you'll live. I just wanted to point out the flaw in your arguement. Take care and know not all Christians are arrogant fools as you claim.
ReplyDeleteI never claimed all Christians were arrogant fools, for one. I just have found that there are many out there who are arrogant when it comes to their attitude about what is ultimately true or good in this world, and that they ridicule others for being nonbelievers. Two, I never claimed that we somehow know everything now and are not at all ignorant. But I can tell you the human race was much more ignorant a couple thousand years ago than it is now. Of course we don't really know much, if anything, at all when it really comes down to it. And of course science doesn't have all of the answers, but it sheds light on our situation and gives us an idea of what's NOT the case and what is most likely to be the case. You talk about paradigm shifts as though no progress between them is ever made, as though no one paradigm is any better than any other paradigm when it comes to epistemic status. To me, science is always progressing and improving, and with more experience and future development of the human race, our perspective, while changing, will become cultivated at the same time and with every new paradigm shift, and our awareness of reality will be heightened. New observations will be made, and new ideas will be bred, and new knowledge will surface. Humans used to believe that everything revolved around Earth, as well as many other untrue things, because they hadn't the capability to see things the way we can see things now. You seem to think you have the answer, the truth. You may not consider it arrogance, and it doesn't really matter if it is or not. I think it is intellectual laziness and capricious musings. You say you are an advocate of critical thinking. I think you're just satisfied believing something without giving yourself a real reason, aside from being that you just want to believe it, because maybe it makes practical sense in your life or whatever. Well, I have a hard time imagining someone who can be a Christian, an advocate of critical thinking, and brutally honest with themselves, all at the same time. If you have faith, that's great. It's good to have faith. What's not good is letting a belief system that is completely ungrounded with sufficient evidence or warrants make you who you are. Maybe you chose to be a Christian after going down the rabbit hole, as you say, but is it necessary? Could you not have come up with something else? Could you really be a critical thinker and believe that someone a long time ago died to save the entire human race? Could you really believe that there's a place called hell that you could go to and experience after you die? Could you really believe that there is something out there that knows everything, as though there really is an all seeing eye somewhere in the universe? The question is, how could you, a philosophy student and critical thinker, possibly believe those things in all honesty?
ReplyDeleteYou seem reasonable enough on the science stuff. The whimsicalness of the statement before seemed bad but when you explained yourself you seem to grasp scientific theory, knowledge and paradigm shifts.
ReplyDeleteSo to adress philosphy, faith, and critical thinking. Believe it or not the philosophy classes improved my faith. But the answer to all of your questions is simply, yes. To all of them. If I wanted too I could present very valid arguments to tear down knowledge and truth itself, I could even logically tear down Christian beliefs. But, I have faith, just as everyone has faith in tons of things that are unfounded. I chose christainity for serval reasons and in my heart believe them to be true. I do however, struggle from the things I've learned not because they challenge my faith but they challenge everything I've ever known. My faith is not my easy way out, for there are no easy ways out, no matter the path you will come to terrible conclusions and even worse walls. I see no difference between the christian faith and someone's faith in free will, faith in truth, faith in knowledge, or faith in morality. As I can equally tear them all down. However, just because I can tear them down doesn't mean I have too for I am a strong advocate for everyone of the things on my list. I can argue both sides of the field but I have choosen a side.That's the true beauty of philosophy there are no right answers, but that statement in and of itself is debatable.
In conclusion you say it's hard to believe a Christian and an advocate of critical thinking is being brutally honest with themself. Well in a way you'd be right, I'm not logically brutally honest with myself. But only because the words brutally and honest would have no bearing and dare I say words themself become void. I believe in all our amazing wonder of being human, we are human and are flawed in many ways so our logic can't be perfect if we are not perfect. So let's be brutally honest and agree the humans and any logic or reason from humans cannot be perfect. God on the other hand is different. I want to stress I'm not trying to convert you, just give you my view as you requested it.
I can sense that you are fairly reasonable, but I have more questions. What makes you need to choose any side at all? Why have set beliefs at all? Is it about Pascal's wager? And what do you mean, "no matter the path you will come to terible conclusions"?
ReplyDeleteWhen you say, "that's the true beauty of philosophy there are no right anwers", aside from being debatable, your view of philosophy is slightly demented, not to mention demeaning and degrading. Are you sure you're not just rationalizing your way to your preferred viewpoint of Christianity by using the techniques you learned in philosophy to "tear down" the walls of logic, reasoning, science, etc? To me, it seems like you are doing just that, and it makes me ashamed to hear what you have said about the true beauty of philosophy. And if you don't understand why, then you're just not thinking enough about it. Schopenhauer believed that reason was a tool of our will, and you seem to demonstrate that.
Philosophy started out as a pursuit of knowledge. It can be translated as "loving knowledge". I think it is sick to pervert such a fantastic concept into something so meritless, something that is used to manipulate reality, rather than attempt to uncover it.
You say human logic/reason can't be perfect, but "God on the other hand is different". Perfect is a word humans derived to speak of earthly things. To cast out our language and attempt to pull in anything bigger than what humans can experience in the world is senseless. Love, knowledge, morality, strength, power, etc. are all concepts within human language that have developed within and ONLY within human experience. To apply the imaginary absolute versions of these concepts to anything that is supposed to be existing for real outside of the bounds of human experience, i.e. a God that is unearthly, unobservable, and unexperienced, is just making things up and abstracting reality. Why must we believe in a supernatural being? Can we not cope otherwise? Is it so hard to embrace the fact that once we die, it is very possible that we will experience no such thing as an afterlife, that there is no such thing that has absolute knowledge, that there is no such intelligent being that created the universe, and so on and so forth? Why do we have to believe in anything at all? Can't we just live practically, and embrace it all despite the suffering, the unknown, the meaninglessness of it all? It seems to me you have a lot more ground to cover, a lot more questions to consider, and a lot more ideas to investigate. Don't be lazy about it and don't be afraid of it. The rabbit hole goes deeper than you think.
I have no choice but to choose. That is why a side must be chosen.
ReplyDeleteWhat I mean by all paths lead to terrible conclusions, is that if you go deep enough your world will get destroy by logic or reason. I'm not down playing the importance of logic and reason, they are the best tools we have and they work rather well.
You push God farther away than God is. Jesus walked on earth. You may deny that he is God but he did live, historians have proven that much. Then there's the bible, that's a link to God as well. As far as an afterlife, that by its nature is pretty unprovable, but lack of proof is not proof. I think to skepticism about lack of proof not being proof. For if everything needed a proof skepticism would tear up all knowledge. However my main argument against skepticism is more complex than just rejecting it.
Towards the end you say embrace the meaningless of it all, well if that's the route you want to go then I assume your going the subjective route. If your going the subjective route you should realize my faith is in God is just the same as your faith in anything (everyone has faith in something). If you go the objective route that leads to God as well because this objective truth had to come from somewhere. I think you would prefer the subjective route. There many nooks and crannies of these arguments that I won't go into. And as far as the rabbit's hole is consered, I'm still trying to find the bottom, but I think I'm better for it. When I said I went down and came back up I meant I did challenge all my Christian beliefs and was able to keep them intact with plain logic and reason, not with I think this because I was taught too. There might be some contradiction but meh no one can be practical and believe anything without a condraction or two. The human condition is a massive contradiction by itself.
Ok, so you have to choose, but why do you really hang on to Christianity as an option even? Is it like Pascal's wager where you feel it's just safer to believe, just in case? Or do you just have a sense of "something more" that leads you to the idea of something called God? Honestly, to just take other people's word for it that Jesus lived and was actually the son of God is not necessarily logical or reasonable. Nor is believing that the Bible is an actual "link" to God, for the fact that it was written by humans. And you say absolutely nothing about how it is logical to believe in an afterlife. Certainly lack of proof of an aferlife is not proof that there isn't an afterlife, but you still don't explain how your belief in an afterlife is reasonable or logical at all. It is certainly not based on experience, and there is no logical necessity you could possibly point to for there being an afterlife. If anything, there is more of a logical necessity for there NOT being an afterlife. And you keep saying your faith in Christianity is just like my faith in whatever I might have faith in, but it is not. How do you know I even have faith in anything at all? Maybe I just live day to day, presupposing I won't be dead the next day, presupposing it's going to be warm enough to leave my sweater at home, presupposing my house won't be on fire when I get home, and so on and so forth. My "faith" in the idea that when I go to sleep at night, I'll wake up the next morning is NOTHING like Christian faith. My "faith" that class will be held tomorrow on time, as usual, is also nothing like Christian faith. My "faith" that I'll do well on my finals is also NOTHING like Christian faith. Christian faith is faith in total miracles, faith in a supernatural afterlife, a supernatural world, a supernatural savior, a soul, a supreme all-knowing being, a transcendal set of morals, a transcendental purpose to life, etc. etc. and to say that your beliefs in such things have been kept intact by plain logic and reason is just insanely ridiculous, and I don't even think you really know what logic and reason even are at this point. Also I don't understand your earlier statement about the world being destroyed by logic and reason, and how that even ties into the fact that you somehow maintain Christian beliefs using the same logic and reason. Do you think logic and reason just leads you to a world where nothing is certain, so all that's left then is to just settle into whichever perspective you find to be the most comfortable or preferred given your personal values, tastes, etc.? You seem so satisfied with your beliefs it's like you don't care to REALLY question them, because you think you now have the golden ticket to justify them. Well I think it's an illusion you have. I don't think you've thought deeply enough about the issue. Maybe you just have to make a stand, and you can't make one up on your own that isn't just riding the coattails of some already established set of unwarranted beliefs.
ReplyDeleteYou keep telling me to think deeper but becuase you dismiss my arguments so casually just impiles you don't understand them. I'm not insulting your intelligence, as I can tell you seem rather smart. I could explain all of arguments but that would take a very long time and over this site is not the best place for you to learn them as these arguments are very complex and often confusing. It took me a long time to form them and get enough knowledge the understand them.
ReplyDeletePerhaps it's is you who needs to look deeper. Dismiss what you think you know about truth, knowledge, meaning, faith, logic, and reason. Look to the root of each of these and maybe you will know what I mean.
I'm coming into this late, but I cannot help but think that, Anon 8:52, that you will find if you are truly honest with yourself that your last paragraph is a farce. You know that there is no necessity that there must be a god behind everything. If you are as philosophically astute as you say you are, there is no logical necessity for anything to be the foundation for knowledge, truth, meaning, or logic. Having faith that there is that kind of foundation isn't the same as saying that I faith that my computer is sitting right in front of me. There are big differences in evidence between the two scenarios. But you know that already. My question is: why don't you acknowledge that?
ReplyDelete8:52, your arguments just aren't really arguments to me. You talk about logic and reason without formally defining them, for one, and you make claims pertaining to the "truth" that are not warranted, and worst of all, you claim that logic and reason has kept your Christian beliefs intact, which is just the silliest thing I've ever heard. Of COURSE I don't understand your arguments, because I am failing to see any real structure to them or any kind of step-by-step rationale. Now, if you were to just come out and say, "I believe in God and Jesus and an afterlife because it all helps me get by, in a practical way, and I don't want to feel like I'm talking to myself every time I pray, and I don't want to feel like I'm going to be nothing when I die and I want to feel like there is meaning to my life", THAT would make sense to me. THAT would be an honest answer, and that would HONESTLY be saying that a) you have no clue whether there's a god or not b) you don't CARE because either way, you're living the life you want to. But, since you seem to be saying that Christianity is just a casual faith (yet also gained through logic and reason), just like faith that the sun will rise tomorrow or faith in free will (which by the way makes no difference whether you have faith in it or not, because you will still act the same way most likely), it's like you're just putting Christianity into a category of every day, normal beliefs that are totally reasonable and not difficult to truly believe in. You can't analogize Christian faith with every other kind of faith, which is basically what 9:04 seems to be saying too. BTW, if you haven't already, you might want to look into what Nietzche had to say about knowledge, truth, Christianity, and such.
ReplyDelete