I see that you're writing about the Abrahamic god. But by what mechanism and logical process have you summarily eliminated Brahma, Allah, Ra, Zeus, Yu-huang, etc.(I could go on for thousands) and their compelling stories and explanations for the world and how it works? -Anonymous
----
Thanks for writing in, Anon.
I get variations of this question from time to time, and they always make me feel a little weird, because my answer is usually; "Well, I didn't." But I always get the impression that the asker KNOWS that I didn't... because of course I didn't. I know a lot of people who think very seriously about faith and religion and to my knowledge none have even attempted this.
Some of the more aggressive atheists that I know often use such statements to belittle the concept of faith, as if the only reason the faithful are the faithful is because we haven't fully thought it through, and here is the supposed proof: of all the revelations and faith stories out there, we couldn't possibly have truly sampled them all, and so how do we know that we are "right," so to speak.
We don't. We're doing faith, not science. You can talk about mechanisms and logical processes all day... they really don't help you all that much, here.
For some people, that's the end of it, the smoking gun that shows that faith is simply a crutch for irrational people. They may even be right, but religious faith is not so unique in this regard as some people think. There is another aspect of our lives that exists outside of our mechanisms and logical processes... love.
When thought about in a rational way, love is, put simply, a stupid risk, if it truly exists at all; an old fashioned way of thinking that causes far more problems than it gives solutions, unnecessary in our world.
I mean think about it... REALLY think about it. What is love, REALLY? How many different tales are there out there about what it means to actually be in love? How many people who swear that their way is the only real way?
And the damage it causes! Just think of all the broken hearts, and that's including so-called "good" love. How many people have hurt or even killed others claiming to be motivated by love? How many people maybe were actually in a place of love, but then took it's claims too far and became abusive? Or how many claimed love, only to use it for the sake of control or to use another human being? How many people have stayed in dangerous situations because of love?
All of this... and for what benefit? What does love gain people that they could not also achieve through other, less controversial means? It isn't necessary for procreation, simple friendships can provide companionship, some even argue that resolving sexual needs is best done without it. I mean, if sex was simply a matter of wanting sexual release, and then finding someone else who also wanted it, wouldn't everything just be easier? Fewer worries about consent, or obligation, that get tied up in things when you bring the term love to the table?
And how do you decide you're in love? How do you decide WHO to love? So you love this one person? By what mechanic have you decided that they are best for you, the most compelling? By what logical process have you eliminated the other billions of people in the world who might be a better match? If you haven't bothered to do your homework... what are you even doing, loving someone?
Every argument I just gave is true... and also ridiculous. Because love ISN'T about doing the math, and in general, people know that. It's not about logical conclusions or mechanisms. It's something we do despite the risks because... well... because. It's an irrational thing, and so it doesn't make ANY sense at all in rational terms. It is still a choice... love must be nurtured, it ebbs and flows... but it's not gonna make much sense on a spreadsheet. Ultimately, love is an act of faith, not religious faith, but faith in someone else, despite the risks and unknowns.
Religious faith works in a similar way. They aren't rational. There are no tangible benefits that can't be gained elsewhere. And they are certainly vulnerable to abuse. And yet, for so many people they are simply a fact of life, something that it is hard to imagine living without.
This isn't to say that they are directly tied... one can certainly love without needing religion. It's also not meant as apologia. I guess what I am going for, here, is education. If you are not a person of religion, maybe this is a reasonable example of how an intelligent person could hold an irrational point of view.
Or, maybe not. That too.
No comments:
Post a Comment