Re: 2012 U.S. Presidential Election
Fisherking. I will preface my response:Originally Posted by Fisherking
Although I like to think of myself as a Bokononist ("Live by the harmless untruths that make you brave and kind and healthy and happy."), I am fundamentally an anti-theist. When I was in my teenage years I was a Christian, of a Protestant denomination, I went on a mission, I went to Bible Study, I went to Youth Groups, etc.
Now my response:
I have come to realise, through study, research and my own independent thought that all religion is merely meta-physics whose doctrinal underpinnings are entirely the mythological and fictional thoughts of those who authored them. I believe the sooner that all religion, at first, is left at home and then, eventually, is forgotten entirely the better our societies will become, on the whole. We will be able to discuss the here, the now, the future and the past without shoehorning in the dogma and emotional baggage that comes with belief without evidence.
I also understand that it can be and often is disingenuous to attempt to disenchant the devout and the believers, (hence why I try to act and live as a Bokononist). I understand that an existential view of the world, and understanding that everything we think we know of ourselves has its basis in the social constructs we live by, is not a mindset that appeals to everyone. They are often happy with their myth of choice. Others may be intellectually unable to grapple with the notion that existence, as viewed through the senses of a being of this dimension, space and density, is not unified in any sense other than the quantum mechanical -- at least by any measure that we could imagine or understand. If people are generally happy with their faith then I have no quarrels with that. In the same way that no one would quarrel whether I had vanilla or chocolate ice-cream this evening. I also understand, first-hand, that numinous experience is of profound importance to an individual of faith, and they often describe the events with deep emotion and beauty. Yet, it is nothing more -- intense, well-worded emotion.
Let us set aside the labels of "left-leaning" and "right-leaning" as they are irrelevant. It is possible to be a progressive member of any denomination, just as it is possible to be a conservative atheist. Additionally it is usually, in our society, in the interest of any politically interested group to further their aims by demonising their opponent. The same usually holds true in the practice of law, where cases are often won and lost by showing your opponent to be of disrepute. I would prefer we as a society did not need to do so, but it is an effective tool -- ask, or better watch the speeches of, any member that participated in the Republican National Convention. After all our minds are significantly quicker to emotion than to reason.
Now, I know exactly what you mean, and have experienced what you say first hand. Atheists, especially on the internet often come across as if they were "shouting" their opinions. I feel Kurt Vonnegut sums up this mindset best:
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before.
He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way.
These people often come across as if they are members of some elite club that have had the good grace to stumble upon the fundamental truth that all religion is fiction, without exception. That is not to say that a work of fiction cannot pose questions, or provide advice, or satire or any other number of possibilities, as any fiction is ultimately grounded in the dissection and synthesis of someone's or some group's reality. However, at it's core it is not reality and should never be applied wholesale.
However, for anyone who has ever taken the time to study the core beliefs and myths of any religion it quickly becomes obvious that those people who do not question the flaws in logic, the dogma and the absurdity of their chosen belief are likely to either be deluded automatons or intellectual children. It is overwhelmingly frustrating to deal with people who have an almost irrational fear of science, a fear of facts and a fear of evidence based reasoning. Despite all the benefits these methods have bestowed upon us both practically and theoretically. People who will often even attribute these advances and gains to their chosen fiction, failing to see the contradiction in doing so.
I would hazard a guess that Dawkins, like so many other atheists, is ultimately tired of and frustrated with arguing with people who bury their heads in the sand when the truth and evidence conflicts with the fiction they have chosen to believe. In a gross effort to lessen the cognitive dissonance caused by said evidence. My evidence for this guess would be based on the method of his outburst -- Twitter. A means of communication that at its core is an internet microblogging outlet for thoughts and emotions.
Ultimately, I am not saying god does not or meta-physics do not exist. What I am saying is, that god is irrelevant and so too is the question of god.
#Hillary4prism 
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks