It's been a couple of months since I began this series, and I've been putting off concluding it because it's such a huge subject and there's just too much to discuss. Yet, at the same time, in my own mind the whole theism-vs-atheism debate is entirely reconciled. And that is precisely the reason I am writing this series, which I thought might end with this entry but which may be continued...
As others may have surmised, I am also doing research for a new book on the subject; hence, the many comments have been useful. One of the main points of my book and my work as a whole is to explore these important issues from a freethought perspective, which means a relatively unattached view, as would be done in an anthropological study. What I have really been expressing in this series, then, is my perspective of reality, the one I have been living my entire life, which is quickly becoming substantial in longevity, experience and interpretation. In other words, I've been around a while now, and I know who I am.
God v. No God is neverending
I have often described myself as neither a theist nor an atheist. I also do not particularly use the terms "pantheist" or "secular humanist" in describing myself. Nor do I take the label of "agnostic," which means "one who does not know," because I do know many things. In some subjects, such as brain surgery, I am agnostic, while in others I am gnostic, which means "one who knows."
Thus, I neither automatically believe nor dismiss in any given moment, but I do engage in what I aver is logical thinking at the appropriate time. For example, if I am on a mountaintop viewing an astounding sunset and rolling, misty hills in front of me, I may wish to think (and exclaim), "There is a god!" I know very well what that statement means to me, and I have absolutely no problem with its veracity based on my definition of the word "god."
If, on the other hand, some atrocity occurs, such as the rape and murder of an innocent person of any age and either gender, I reserve the right to exclaim equally loudly, "There is no good god in charge of everything!" That is how my mind works—that is how I define freethought. I know myself, and it is futile to tell me otherwise, which some have tried to do, including using invectives and mindgames.
And that kneejerk reaction is exactly the problem with the rabid members of both the theist and atheist camps—they seem not to be able to control their impulses when they encounter someone who does not see reality exactly as they do. They must make disparaging comments, essentially attempting to insult others into their viewpoints. If you peruse this series of articles as well as others I have written here on atheism, you will see that there are a number in which both theists and atheists feel the need to inform me that my perspective is lacking in some manner, to put it mildly, because I do not see things their way. I would wager that I am not alone, but we do not hear as much from this "excluded middle."
What is freethought?
To me, the word "freethought" conveys the ability to think freely, period. I have defined it on my Freethought Gear also as:
the liberty to question and doubt unscientific and uncritical beliefs, especially as concerns religion"
Each human being is endowed from birth, hopefully, with the ability to think freely. However, external factors constantly shape the way he or she does think eventually—and here, of course, is where religion comes in very heavily, as religion is a brainwashing, mind-control tool par excellence, and its purveyors know that fact very well. In order truly to be freethinkers, then, we need to break through the religious conditioning to determine whether or not any of it represents the truth. Our exploration of religious ideation, however, need not lead to the complete dismissal of it, as in a remark oft-heard in atheist circles: "Religion is all bunk."
While I as a freethinker do not find myself subscribing to much religious ideology, I absolutely disagree with the contention that "religion is all bunk." That statement is completely inaccurate, and here is where I do not find myself in that particular unbelieving camp. My freethinking perspective allows me to enjoy religion—when I know its true roots, of which too many people are unaware—without being a subscriber to it or a believer in its gods.
Here is the bottom line: Whether or not the entire worldview is correct, or whether or not there are details here and there that are not exactly precise or accurate, neither theism nor atheism is desirable if its adherents or spokespeople are not pleasant and constructive participants in society. In other words, while atheists complain that powerful theists such as clergy and politicians are nasty and despotic, and hence theism must be destroyed, we do not want to replace one unpleasant and tyrannical mind-control agency with another. If your perspective of reality as manifested on a daily basis in your interactions with others is hostile, aggressive and selfish, whether you are a theist or an atheist, your mindset is not an improvement over what we already find dominant. Fanaticism and extremism in any ideology is not the answer.
Stay tuned for more...
Sources & Further Reading
Freethought Examiner atheism articles
Freethought Gear
Freethought Nation
Comments
I have not followed your other stories or peoples' criticisms of you but I believe you to be right on. The key is knowing religion's "true roots" and what spirituality is all about and most religious extremists are completely unaware of this which to me is a paradox. Nice to see such an intelligent voice presenting such thought-provoking material thank you.
I have not followed your other stories or peoples' criticisms of you but I believe you to be right on. The key is knowing religion's "true roots" and what spirituality is all about and most religious extremists are completely unaware of this which to me is a paradox. Nice to see such an intelligent voice presenting such thought-provoking material thank you.
Starts off very well, some honest philosophising. Then it goes onto to beg the question then later it confuses categories again. There is nothing despotic about theism. Nor atheism. Also pointing out the error in someones thinking is not called atheism. You're a very busy and no doubt productive person. This matter deserve more time though - slower with more deliberation. In praise of slow: www carlhonore dot com / ?page_id=6
We, humanity, need more people who engage life the way you do. If everybody displayed the tolerance and understanding you consistently displayed in this series, that will be paradise returned. Please, never stop doing what you do!
I'll read some more of this article latter,.. I've read some of Acharya's letters and I'm not sure her usage of old testament scripture is balanced,... BUT I've got to admire our lady philosopher for her astuteness in trying to hunt down the intricacy's of subjective/objective reality in modern Socratic fashion* You go Girl !
Every time I try to have a conversation with a theist by asking questions and stating facts, I'm accused of being hostile and aggressive even when I choose the kindest, gentlest words I can and keeping all my opinions and feelings to myself. The discussion is halted after I'm *told* what I think and feel--including being told a fanatic and extremist!
As a former Christian, the writings of Joseph Campbell regarding myth, religion & spirituality have been a great influence in my life; adding a measure of "balance" in my life's journey.
I find I cannot agree that the question is open.
The evidence is in and there is no guy in the sky.
If you wish to cling to some valuable oddity of a particular religion, enjoy your ritual.
But if there is any truth in the world we should grasp it and release the lie. If there was a god or even a benevolent inclination in the universe or even a little local spirit in our small corner it would be in opposition to all that is Holy in science.
Anyone going into the backyard and stargazing for just a moment with understanding of the magnitude he is witnessing would ipso-facto stop pretending to know the all encompassing truth of all time and all where.
But, that comprehension is sadly lacking in religious folks that can imagine any number of gods, angels, demons and spirits into existence before breakfast.
They don't remember that their brand of lunacy is an accident of birth...Not some long evaluated conclusion built on a foundation of reality.
Atheism is the beginning of wisdo
Religion is but the brakes on the wheels of advancement. You are a special person to embrace both, special like most religious folk who ignore fact. I guess what your saying is that you can appreiciate the group setting of church and the fallacy of their "non profit" efforts. But it is a business irregardless, and they do what business does best . . . make money through what you call brainwashing, and your right. Imagine ten thousand years in the future and man has ignored the laws of nature and jeoprodized ours and many species existance due to overpopulation, pollution and famine. How would you feel that the greatest experiment ever was for nothing. . . was for god. With all due respect.
Religion is a garment that clothes layers of truth,...an applied calculus to reality of a people. In science there was once a notion called spontaneous generation which stated life forms are self generating when a given environment meets certain criteria,... if I remember right. Later spores were found to be the origins of these ambiguous life forms. To believe that reality was born in a vacumn is equally unscientific as I see it. Reality or its origen therefor must be eternal. The only question remaining, is whether this ( eternal something ) is intelligent. We have consciousnes,...can a kenetic state ( consciousnes )..exceed the potential from which it came ? As I see it atheism is sterile and is more of an emotion than reason,..equally unscientific. Is there or is there not Divine intelligence responsible for reality ?... Where does reason point to?.. In what direction does it trail off ?
All the comments today, collectively are very intelligent so, there is intelligence out there, perhaps giving it no label is a breath of fresh air and cancels all labels! Now we've got 6.7
billion (less .00001%)to 'enlighten'!
D.M. Murdock writes:"Each human being is endowed from birth, hopefully, with the ability to think freely. However, external factors constantly shape the way he or she does think eventually."
It is the way in the biological capability for thought is shaped, i.e. education that I think is central to the issue. If each human is taught, even from childhood, to use those techniques and methods which our species has found most reliable and accurate we will be better off than those, however emotionally appealing, that have not. The methods of clarifying thought called logic has served us well, and lead to better practical decisions than contradiction of those methods. Similarly, the methods of evaluating data and building explanatory models found in science are unquestionably useful in establishing fact.
The problem is not how one wishes to relate emotionally to existence, which is a matter of taste, but how one looks at factual reality. It is in this area that most religions mislead.
Petracca writes:"To believe that reality was born in a vacumn is equally unscientific as I see it."
Wrong. Belief, especially about things about which we have no data is "unscientific". We don't existence. We know it is. What we reliably observe we call reality.
"Reality or its origen therefor must be eternal."
That's not clear. Reality may be "eternal". If so, it has no origin.
"The only question remaining, is whether this (eternal something) is intelligent."
Why would one think it was?
"We have consciousnes,...can a kenetic state (consciousnes )..exceed the potential from which it came?"
You mean consciousness requires energy? How is this related to intelligence?
"As I see it atheism is sterile and is more of an emotion than reason,..equally unscientific."
Not believing something out of a lack of supporting reason isn't emotion, and is scientific in the sense of being bound by fact. Believing in a deity without reason or supporting fact is emotional and unscient
Oops. "We don't existence." Left out "understand". In other words we have no way of understand existence. Why there is something (existence) rather than nothing we don't understand.
Your thought and mine are exactly the same. I strongly believe that the only way to find the truth in this deceiving world is through the freethought perspective. Your work is astonishing and your reasoning is a bright light on the dark.
I must say Acharya you are informative and intriguing. I love you thoughts and soon hopefuly be able to rad more of your works.
I am discovering more facts about religion than I had hoped to find, but yours has expanded the depth of this knowledge even further. Listen not unto that which destroys the human consciousness value, and their ability to create value, for that is what they seek to destroy is the value of your work..
If you don't believe in any gods, you are an atheist. It's sad that religions have stigmatised this word to the point where people are scared to self-identify as such.
I appreciate your description of this middle, often silent, group of people.
When I use the term agnostic, I am referring to my ability to know the origin of all things. I don't believe that anyone "knows" this in any rational sense. I think we can know things within certain boundaries of assumption, but that is more pragmatic than factual. We claim to know things because they "work."
I appreciate the subjective experience of wonder and a generic term such as god can be a wonderful way to imagine some great consciousness behind it all.
I think where religion becomes harmful is when it claims to know the wishes of some god based on ancient books on the subject. And when these wishes become the basis for governments and civil authority, it so often creates great suffering.
To make mention that people love a good story is cliche’, but the principal consideration with that observation is that love is too tepid a term. Humankind need their stories with a depth of feeling that perverts rationality. Stories can provide comfort, structure, and even provide an individual with identity. A concept can be unbelievably preposterous, but if set forth in a fervent tale, it can gain acceptance in ways and by numbers that mock belief. Examples of this are plentiful from the big picture of religion to smaller notions like conspiracy theories.
To profess non-belief in a supernatural phenomena, no matter what you name it is conducive to critical thinking. To profess belief in a supernatural phenomena creates a mindset that cannot be depended upon to critically make judgments in everyday situations. Because we live in a culture consisting of a majority of believers in the supernatural we often do not recognize this as mass psychosis.
I am not uncomfortable with the provisional label of agnostic. My erstwhile experience has made me realize that there is an entire universe of things that I simply do not know, and simply do not understand. I have been accused of being an atheist without balls, but I don't think that is the case. I just go where the evidence takes me. If that is to oblivion, then it won't matter. If that is to hell, all I can say is that I will be the guy with a pitch fork poking people in the keister. In the meantime, I am too full of life to worry much about it.
We have much in common. I'm one of those 72 yr olds that BHusseinO seems to think are irrelevant now. Being ordained in 1963 by the fundy dispensationalists, I soon left that to seek a more intelligent mindset, but haven't found them anywhere in churchianity.
My conclusion is that one can find better associations in the non-zealous-religious communities.
My question always remains, If an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent "God" made all things and called the result "good," why don't we see this goodness about us in the world? Evidently "inerrant" writers have slipped up & lied to us, & their "God" doesn't have any control over what he made.
The last cult with which I had associations has split up into many fragments since the 80s, each struggling through booklets to convince everyone it is the true spreader of truth. Sad.
And once you leave, their "love" turns into vengeful rage, telling the faithful to shun the excommunicant, who is now in sin. Sad.
Thanks, Acharya, for reason.
There are as many worlds as there are people to dream them up, according to Buddha who never mentions a Creator-God. Eastern philosophies call these myriads of world-views maya which means that to claim to have a full grasp of the factual universe, both seen and unseen and its purpose, is to be deluded. We see mostly the surface of things and even science deals only with the manifest world and the scientific view itself keeps expanding as does our consciousness. Creativity is continuous and evolution takes place on many levels. So when we speak of God we get into mere definitions of a Being or being, any of which must be taken on faith, rejected entirely or left as the greatest mystery of all.
"Manifestation is not magic. It is a process or working of natural principles and laws in order to translate energy from one level of reality to another." David Spangler
Patterns are essential to all of creation and what are patterns but ideas and what are ideas but mind. Arbitrarity is illusion, reality is hung on reason. To say reality is unintelligent is unintelligent, its nothing but intelligent...its us humans that are inconsistent with our (inherited potential,..not doing our homework)which causes the feeling of estrangement or dissociation. Religion.. yes has violated humanity in ways tyrants only dreamed of by teaching people to mentaly hamstring themselves, to despise themselves , to fear eternal suffering in a lake of fire after they die if they don't bow and scrape and beg forgiveness of their supposed inherited wretchedness from Adams sin. The tormented minds and personal hells created by religion are probably only exceeded in evil by the religionists that deny this with their canned smiling Jesus faces. However I believe in God and I believe there is a fundamental truth to the real Jesus because of things I have experienced, subjective.
Acharya is truly the "Coolest Chick" on Planet Earth, if not the Universe! I have read her books, half way through "Christ In Egypt" and I find her writing simply exquisite and the research beyond my comprehension! I think I understand her message in these articles, avoid "extremism" of any type, think for yourself, seek the truth, live the life of the mind! However, I have also read Richard Dawkins's numerous works and I find myself identifying with his concerns, for the threats of religion are real and increasing, Islamic terrorism, Creationism, killing of Medical providers, etc.
I am from the middle ground you were talking about. I am so happy that you take the leap to be out there with your work. You say to the world what i only think silently in my head to the world. thank you thank you for what you are doing!
I've put Gods and Goddesses into the history books of myths and legends of bygone eras. They no longer exist in my mind. I also have no problems with labelling myself Atheist.
I find myself in the middle, too, Acharya S., and your books are a comfort to my distressed soul. I find it frustrating to be in the middle and not have a solid stand either way except in the middle, sometimes leaning this way and sometimes leaning that way changing with the circumstances and evidence. It is a terrible knowing within a cloud of unknowing.
Enjoyed your post. You may relate to mine as well at Sausalito Conscious Living, "Freedom from religion, atheism, political positions and all other identifications."
yes she is a babe/philosopher of the first water.... i am agnostic as well.. and i believe in et etc.... not sure if i am sure to say that the Neflim are our gods or not....but who cares...i am only a 50 % er....half rep and half mammal..
guad Joe
well put! Acharya S, thank you so much!!
'Atheism' literally means 'no theism' (no theology). One can be an atheist without being a fanatic. One can also be an atheist and still appreciate the literary qualities and ancient wisdom of parts of some of the various 'holy scriptures.' I believe these came originally from folklore, more or less, and the reason is that if such a thing as 'divine wisdom' existed, no humans could understand it. On the other hand, if humans can understand the wisdom and moral principles of various religions, then some humans must have been capable of 'thinking them up' in the first place. Religious wisdom is often vary obscure because 1) the simple fact of its human origin and and its potential revolutionary nature made it necessary to disguise it; and, 2) the priesthoods associated with the ruling classes needed to make it even more obscure so that people would feel virtually helpless and incapable of using their own minds to understand social-political reality.
I would imagine that I will be including in that list of people 'telling you who you are' list, however it IS impossible to neither believe in a God(s) or not believe in a God(s).
In so much as I don't believe you can give me one senario where someone would fall outside of both those statements.
I do believe however that you another victim (along with Sam Harris, only with different reasons) of the 'I am an individual/rebel/loner' complex.
I am an atheist. However this tells you almost NOTHING of who i am or what i believe. My morals, intelligence, my past and my future are not inferred one way or another. So why be so scared of accepting your place in either of the all encompassing terms, theist or atheist? Are you worried about not being special or something?
Simple test would be to ask "Do i believe in a God or Gods?" If yes is your answer then you are a theist...any other answer than you're an atheist.
Accepting a 'label' doesn't make you less of a individual.
>>A.S.<<
>>I have often described myself as neither a theist nor an atheist<<
(-Atheist+[T]+Theist-)
I am 100% with you A.S. That has been the point of All my Postings! Stay in the Middle!
The Truth will only be found in the CENTER, by combining serious research from both sides of the isle. Most of the people who post, no nothing of the 'Esoteric' hidden side of religion. They only know the 'exoteric side'(-Exoteric+[T]+Esoteric-). If you knothing of the Esoteric "knowledge" side of Religion. How can anyone be athiest to something they know absolutely nothing about? To become an atheist without 'first' understanding the esoteric side of all religion?
I watched the 2012 movie last night. It was most enjoyable. These guys are on the same page as Hypathia. (Not the doom and gloom part) In fact there was not much of that. I enjoyed the 'Astrological' parts!!!!!!
BTW Kudos on your fan club. Have you noticed how they are getting a little cult like?
"Your work is astonishing and your reasoning is a bright light on the dark." ...You're the light of the world ;)
" must say Acharya you are informative and intriguing. I love you (freudian slip?) thoughts and soon hopefuly be able to rad more of your works."
"Acharya is truly the "Coolest Chick" on Planet Earth, if not the Universe! "
....All i'm waiting for is the
"I want to be a freethinking indivual JUST LIKE YOU" comments and I think you should think about buying a ranch in Waco.
>>Dr.B. writes<<
>>My question always remains, If an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent "God" made all things and called the result "good," why don't we see this goodness about us in the world?<<
I always try to say a lot more, by saying a lot less! Because you do not understand esoteric NATURE. You will see what you wish to see! Like attracts Like! Good/Bad; Up/Down; Hot/Cold; Light/Dark; Gay/Straight; Male/Female...
Does Nature not provide 'Equality' in all its millions of polar opposites? Does the Solar Car not provide Life and Equality to both Hemisphere's, North/South? Is the Soul(ar) peneal gland, not located in the middle of both your Earthly Hemisphere's? Allowing you also to do the same as your SUN, above? You can reason and provide for both your Hemisphere's as well. Your thinking, exactly as the SUN is Doing! Get Re-membering...
"Nature never did betray the Heart that loved her."
"Dr. William Wordsworth"
Please you need deliverance
hook up on www.emmanuel.tv to see prophet TB Joshua manifest the power of GOD live. It will make you better understand the word GOD
...Wow, very poetic..but quite light on actual thoughts or theories. What you are saying basically that every reaction has an opposite and equal reaction right?
Which doesn't answer Dr Brooks statement at all. He was commenting on the lack of evidence of a 'Good' God. The 'savage garden' does not allow for a kind creator. It is survival of the fittest after all, not the kindest or nicest.
What you replied sounds very poetic as I have said but comes across sounding like rhetoric and psuedo intellectual drivel than explanation or suggestion. Would you like to clarify your views in plain english without analogy or abstract speech?
Dan B "Kudos on your fan club..."
Thanks for demonstrating to us, Dan, that the only requirement to be a militant atheist like yourself is to be an obnoxious, insulting, as shole, proving Acharya's series on atheists more accurate with every post you make. Excellent!
So, really you're just jealous of Acharya S. And, apparently you've got nothing better to do than to harass a single female. You're such a brave & courageous militant atheist. Get lost, as shole.
Whoa, are you guys hired or something? Harrass? By reposting comments and pointing out how creepy they are? Lol, I have not insulted, belittled or been rude at all..taht cannot be said of you however. Maybe you should look very closely at your motives for being so over protective of a public figure, writing on a public website.
We have heard of religion being the cause of wars... the last two write ins were an example of a tiff between an devout atheist and the defender of a Golden Meaner or a person that takes the middle road... a new twist on Non religious conflict... PAX !
That's because their logic is flawed! Only my answer is the most rational for the big question!!! The allied atheist alliance!
^^^^^^^^^^^
A joke from southpark
It would seem some people have a lack of humour.
I'm hoping the author herself sees the funny side of my cult analogy as she must see it theirself, if not than I have misjudged them.
Dan, Admittidly I've in this case not perused the particulars but for sake of a limmited window in time for this discussion I'll give an on the fly answer. I respect your effort to attempt a distinct cogent perception concerning god/s or NO god/s, I also understand the maddening psychotic confusion created by religious esoteric dogma. I think its not so much your stance on clarity that Jackson rebuked but rather what appeared a character assualt on the host of this forumn, as well as some bloggers: Waco etc) Concerning Absolute Atheism, I know there is Absolute Vodka but thats just a name...humour/. We are told Einstein being plagued by what appeared some parodox made the remark "God is subtle not malicious" Meaning that He believed there is an underlying consistent dynamic, if only one could find it.(Maybe the Uncertainty principle) Yet on this note Einstein despised what he considered childish and horrific hellfire God religion but loved the divine cosmos. No divinity seems sterile.
In previous posts I was working on the assumption that posters were not ashamed of their comments as they themselves wrote it. No comment was made on the author of the forum either and I believe the only way my comments could be seen as such is if you start off with that misconception and build on it.
I believe the difficulty with what we are dealing with here is 95% language, 5% devout individualism.
When people use phrases such as "God has shown his skill as a painter with that sunset"...or the like, they are not talking about a God, it is a poetic line.
Theism to me is a take it or leave it proposal. Either you believe in a supernatural God, or you don't. As an intelligent person, would you like to take up my challenge of finding a senario when someone neither has belief or lacks belief?
I'd like to remind every1 that I am not dogmatic in my views and am eager to explore new ideas. So can you think of such a senario?
Dan in an earlier post I compared the idea of spontaneous generation(an early science belief of life self generating in proper environment) to be disproved by finding spores.I compared this to the idea that reality could be born in a vacumn. I believe it could not have been. Thus something is eternal,..only two possibilities,..either born from nothing or eternal*If declared eternal..the next question is What is the nature of this eternal something? This has plagued philosophers and scientists for milleniae? In the Cern particle excellerator, physicists are attempting to reproduce the near after environment of the big bang in order to study the hypothetical mass formation out of cooked/fused hydrogen atoms>helium>carbon and all the 92 elements/atom types following this up to molecules, amino acids ..life. A profound study,.. the western worlds penchant for objective and subjective understanding edified in pre- Socratic and Socratic Greece is being tantilizingly realized. One of the >
Oddity's scientists have seemed to have observed is that even a (perfect)vacumn is not perfect in that it can some how borrow energy from the future* Another oddity is that the Atom does not appear to exist until we look for/at it, almost as if it exists in a confluence of existence and non existence or becoming. Quantom Mechanics (mathematics/numbers)is how we see atoms. Mass seems to be just as illusive as God... YET who would deny the existence of mass? Experimental physics is the domain/religion of the intellectually (chosen few)accompanied by the faithful and heretics, the condemned and the sanctified. We can see when studied intensely for clarity, all phenom can lead further than expected. The question may simply be a matter of perspective, Is life ALIVE or is life an illusion created by patterns of eternal electrical charges and perceived in turn falsely by our falsely edified consciuosnes in this eternal cosmic illusion? Is life divine or mechanics? It comes down to Faith *
Well i wouldn't word it that way but i know what you mean.The fact that no one part of any living thing is actually alive provides us with a bit of a challenge to understand what life actually is.
I also find atomic theory fascinating and while I must admit to being a layman in this field I do find it interesting.
I do however see this as a different line of thought to what we were speaking about previously, so i do not see how this can fit into the senario I asked about (No supernatural element here...which would mean to me there is no belief and therefore defacto atheist view).
In regards to the origin's of the universe, and the origin on the singularity we must first rid ourselves of this created or eternal argument as in a singularity there IS no time. Time itself began at the big bang, not just the calculation of it...so words like eternal are meaningless.
This, like the fact that there is no EDGE to the universe...even though it is expanding fills me with wonder..
and awe. However I see no element involved that is outside of nature and to those with the know how they can prove these theories with mathematics.
All this leaves the idea that a conscious force outside of nature exists just as important as munchkins existing. There is no need for a creator as adding one will only raise much more questions and solves pretty much none.
There is so much we do not know and a lot of people will insist that because of this a 'God' is just as probably as not having a God. However everytime the number of unknowns reduces so does the likelyhood of a God....and we know a lot more now than when this idea of God came on the scene.
Hello Dan, I've been out and am not in perfect philosophical condition. The reason I brought up physics and its ambiguity's is to demonstrate that even hard objective science based soley on empirisism strains with all its might to glimpse what it calls Truth. That a vacumn is not completely a vacumn can be compared to a person that insists they are completely barren of deism. As a postulate we can frame any number of hypotheticals and insist this is our belief,... but how often has reality humbled even the most ardent minds? I am all for clarity and the effort to be as reasonable as our human design allows. I'll admit general religion seems carcas like to me,... often a putrid carcas at that,.. but as to whether there exists nothing "Unnatural"or "Supernatural" .. this may be conceptualisation.. for instance what is natural law to us may be divine and we take it for granted, further we may be smug to assume we understand all its being. We expose yesterdays myths but not our own.
I know what you are saying, and due to this I NEVER take on the title of gnostic in reference to my atheism.
However simply saying because we don't know everything that we can't have a belief one way or the other is in my eyes, a cop out.
I don't know who will win my football game tomorrow, but as the other team are 2 leagues above us and half my teams '1st's' are out injured I don't believe we will win. I'm an a-win-ist you could say. Do i KNOW? Am I Gnostic? No, of course not, however all the evidence points towards us being crushed, so that is what I believe.
I'm an agnostic a-win-ist you could say, as are all (sane) a-win-ists.
To the other part of your reply, i think we shuld quantify supernatural. If nature(?!) as we see it counts as super natural to others for example, then what is their nature?
Our nature shows no sign of the supernatural, but if people want to class everything natural as supernatural than that is up to them, but they have watered down super-
nature down to the level where it can be explained away.
This boils down to, as Dawkins put it 'Sexed up Atheism'.
If we define the supernatural as something that is forever outside the understanding of nature, it may make it a little clearer.
If we looks at Clarke's three laws, specifically the third one.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
This however doesn't mean it IS magic. I just cannot convince myself that advanced science or technology is magic just because I don't understand the inner workings.
I accept that people cannot be 100% sure about almost anything, but this does not stop us making judgements on or beliefs in anything in the real world, so why would it hinder belief in any way in reference to Gods?
Pages
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!