I came to this thread following the nomination of Roadtoad's post below, and I must admit that I have only skimmed the majority of it. I post because there is something about Roadtoad's post that drives me crazy. It is nowhere near the more vitriolic anti-theism posts that sometimes populate this form, but I find it problematic just the same. I find it just as problematic as the profoundly untrue assertion that athiests can't be moral.
As usual, Plumjam refuses to get it. Wrapped up in his own narcissistic realm, he bleats on about how the Atheist is either a waste of time and flesh, or how there is no further meaning for the Atheist's "pathetic" excuse for a life. It's condescending, and it's offensive.
Yes, it is. Atheism is but one part of your (or any other Atheist's) life, and to attempt to define one's whole existence by this one aspect is silly at best, or hurtful at worst - depending on how one views atheism.
Last night, I had dinner with two people from this board whom I enjoy reading and for whom I have nothing but deep respect. Normal Dude is a student at UC Davis, entering into the field of molecular biology, with an emphasis on neurological biochemistry, (hope I got that right!), while Hokulele works as a trainer in computers and computer science, particularly with the software her company produces. We're talking of people of accomplishment and courage, something which is increasingly rare in a society which seems to be leaning more and more towards slackers and egotists, people who try to use Fate as an excuse for everything from their own cowardice to their well entrenched bigotry.
To be honest, I don't see much use of Fate as an excuse. Rather, I see people blaming
anything other than themselves for whatever plight they are in. The cult of the victim is one of the largest problems I see in our society today. Can no one take responsibility for their own actions?
As we talked, one thing kept coming up: There was so much that we did not know. At one point, Normal Dude mentioned that in one particular field, there was so much unknown to deal with, it was actually exciting. Hokulele answered that saying that in her astronomy classes, they'd point to something and say, "We don't know that that is." Her answer: "Cool!"
See, this is part of what it means to be not just an Atheist, but a Skeptic. You don't flee the unknown; you go towards it, hoping not only to learn from the familiar, but from the unexplained. Your goal isn't just to take pleasure in the unusual, but to ultimately find out if the Great and Terrible Oz is just some dude hiding behind the curtains in the throne room.
Here is where I start to take issue with this post. Here, it is implied that a theist cannot possibly take delight in learning from the unexplained. A theist cannot possibly understand the thrill of discovery. I find the implication offensive and condescending.
It's simply another way of saying that some of us take greater and greater pleasure in admitting what we do not know than in our insistence that we know more than we do. We have matured in our lives, and take joy in recognizing that there's so much more to do, and equally, so much more we have to offer as our lives progress. Frankly, I find there's greater joy and meaning in that than I ever did as a "saved, sanctified, and justified" Christian, secure in my "knowledge" that I would endure in Heaven once I died. In fact, I find that latter element sad, because ultimately, I would only find "meaning" in my life once I had died and could offer nothing more to society.
Again, this is both offensive and condescending. I believe in God, yet do not believe that I will only find meaning in heaven. I can freely admit to what I do not know (and believe you me, its a lot), and I take just as much as joy as you do in living this life to the fullest.
I find I can do great things in this current stage of my life. If there's an "Atheist Value" to be found, it's the knowledge that my time here is short, and that what benefit I can offer to society needs to be given today, and not set aside for later when I'm nothing more than a memory.
With respect, that is not an 'atheist value'. Any more than the assertion that the knowledge that life here is short, there is no eternal reward or damnation, so you may as well get what you can now and forget everyone else can be said to be an 'atheist value'. Your desire to help society and others is fantastic, but it is not a value that comes from atheism per se.
While I am well aware of scores of Christian/religious charities, I'm also well aware of the vast number of them who suck down voluminous amounts of cash for "administrative expenses." (I should note that the Randi Foundation seems to operate pretty much on the cheap, but seems to deliver far more bang for the buck. And Randi's pretty open about how it's done.) There are a number of "atheist" and "humanist" entities engaged in the charitable, but they generally don't advertise themselves that way, and they aren't overly picky about who they bring in to help, demanding that they be competent rather than dogmatic.
The force of your argument here is almost completely diluted by the lack of evidence and cherry picking therein. The 'vast number' who suck down voluminous amounts of cash for administrative expenses - without a single example. And the one example for an atheistic charity - the JREF - really is small potatoes in the world of charitable foundations. I did a quick check to see how a couple of prominent Christian charities use their funds. The Salvation Army in Canada use about 85% of all money in direct help for the homeless, the mentally ill, the physically challenged, victims of drug and alcohol abuse and others under their care. Another, World Vision Canada, uses about 82.5% of funds for direct aid. Only 5.4% is used for administration, with fundraising being the largest non direct aid expenditure. Your paragraph raises the spectre of incompetant, dogmatic theists lining their own pockets with 'administrative expenses' money and is insulting to the large number of Christian and other religious charities helping so many around the world.
Part of this also requires me to show the truth of religion, that for the most part, it's a lie.
Here, I disagree with you. But notice that I am not proselytizing or personally insulting you, damning you to hell, or anything else.
I won't accomplish much by assaulting people with facts and figures, much as I was when I was being "witnessed" to by believers years ago, prior to becoming a Christian. (I'm pretty certain that many people become believers if for no other reason than to get the proselytizers to just shut up, recognizing that once you say "Yes," they'll leave you alone and never talk to you again.)
I'm pretty certain that no one makes a faith choice based on wanting the proselytizer to shut up. And I'm also pretty sure that you don't really think this either. Are insults like this really helping your position much? Do you buy something from the telemarketer to get them to shut up?
Instead, I have to live my life in a manner that's gracious, honest, and courageous.
And I try to do the same. To your list, I add this: I try to live my life with love. The kind of selfless love of our fellow humans that is exhibited, for example, by Tricky in pushing someone's car or giving twenty bucks to someone who needs it. Perhaps he doesn't think about it that way - but that is how I see it. It is not easy, and I don't always live up to it, but the best I can do is try.
That's not easy; our society rewards the boor, the liar, the coward.
I know it can seem this way sometimes, but I also see society reward the hard working, the modest, and those with the courage of their convictions. All too often I see people who are self centred and boorish complain about everything and and everyone around them, who see high school as their 'glory days'. I don't think that society has rewarded them.
But there's value in doing this. I think of Metullus, of Girl6, of Terry, of Doubting Stephen, of JJ, of Zep, of other people on this board (and a number who have unfortunately left), who demonstrate there is a greater value, a greater reward for stepping out in boldness and declaring the realities of life, of living within those realities, and ultimately in reaching beyond them with our compassion, our intellect, our passion. The whole idea is to reach Beyond, and bring it into focus, to make it new, to make it real. That speaks of greater integrity than this continued bleat that we cannot do this, because this is God's territory.
And I can think of many people who similarly declare realities in life, who also reach Beyond and bring it into focus and make it new or real. And who also happen to be theists. Believing in God no more makes you brain dead than not believing in God makes you an amoral sociopath. Plenty of brilliant people who have expanded our understanding of the universe we live in have also believed in God.
What's next for me? Finishing my own education, and becoming a Marine Engineer. I'll probably be in my 60's, but I'm pretty sure if I can still draw breath, I can contribute to bettering people's lives. And rather than doing so because it gives some mystical deity a nice warm feeling about me, I can do so because it's based wholly on the facts, that the effects of my efforts can be measured, can be replicated, can be seen, and that ultimately, will outlast all the memory of me from centuries on.
The idea that theists only contribute to the betterment of other people's lives in order to give a mystical deity a nice warm feeling is offensive and condescending. And your reasons for doing so can be seen as nothing more than another form of vanity project in any event.
That's the difference between you and me, Plumjam. I want to serve. You want to be serviced. It's the difference between love and sex, between creation and masturbation.
The implication that the dividing line between wanting to serve and wanting to be serviced is atheiosm/theism is offensive and insulting. Many theists want to serve, just as many atheists want to be serviced.
that was so good I bssvpr ybyyrq (and nominated)
