I've always found that the most difficult people to argue with are those that have closed minds. Most of us have at least one unshakable belief that cannot be swayed, whether it is something we learn as a child, a religious tenant, a more, a conspiracy, there is something in all of us that even insurmountable evidence is not adequate to distinguish. And perhaps that is necessary to even hold an intelligible conversation. Imagine talking to the most adamant and biased political pundit, never listening to your words, your logic, your argument, only postulating on his next statement. He is Infinitely confident that no matter what you say you cannot diverse his logic or change his opinion in any regard. But also postulate talking to the completely open, non argumentalist. An open canvas of an individual who will accept anything you say based on even the most frail logic and evidence. It would be like talking to a mirror that never gives you any new information, and simply regurgitates the data you input, never putting any thought or analysis in, never coming up with a worthwhile computation, never coming up with an opinion about anything. This is why we have discourse. This is why argument is necessary for an intelligent species to thrive. Perhaps this is all a bain to the nihilist (me being partially favorite to this stance) who believes in nothing, but for the rest of us there exist things like values, things like truth, beauty, good and evil, and all that wonderful stuff that Kant drags on and on about.
But who are we as a people today? From a religious perspective, do any of us adhere to every tenant of their religious text? Does any member of any religion, besides one who can dictate the analysis of their texts to their followers (the pope, cult leaders, etc.) understand 100% of the structure of their own "chosen" faith? Most of us blindly affiliate ourselves with a religion based on the conditions we were raised. If you were raised Mormon and found balance and joy in your life, you would be completely sold on extending the religion to your friends, family, and offspring. Even if you don't truly understand how some John Smith character carried out some utterly improbable means of developing the tenets of your religion, you will probably practice it, at least at some limited extent. And when someone asks you the severely unpopular question of what faith you belong to you wont hesitate to say "I am Mormon!". The same goes for the person who experienced the very same relationship with religion and had a negative experience They will question the contradictions and improbabilities that are scattered throughout every one of the world faith, and they will do one of two things. They will find a new faith, or they will disavow their belief in their specific faith and most likely the concept of god.
The problem with this is that a very short amount of people delve deeper into the introspective process of analyzing the question; "Is there a god?" For this question is hard. It doesn't deal with your parents idioms, and idiosyncrasies you practiced in your upbringing. It has nothing to do with your belief in Santa or the Easter bunny, or the betrayal you felt when you found out the truth behind such innocent ruses. It doesn't have anything to do with the anger you feel towards the priest who harmed you, or the pastor who manipulated you. It has nothing to do with your fear of inevitable death. It is philosophy. It is science, physics, and math at the highest possible levels, that lamens like myself often feel they have no business even touching the subject. But at the same time it is something that we should all be responsible for asking ourselves. We should be asking ourselves the big questions about life. Why are we here? What is, if there is a meaning to life? Is there a god? Not nearly enough of us ask ourselves these questions.
So that's the question that I would like to ask every person I meet, no matter if they are the closed minded assured, the blank slate, the existentialist, or the nihilist, how are you not agnostic? How can you prove that some things are possible while some things aren't? If you are a religious person, how do you rectify the fact that you have personal beliefs that don't adhere to your exact religious tenants? I hear people contradict their own beliefs all the time. People who's doctrine specifically tells them that they are a chosen people, who admit they they believe all inherently good people go to heaven. People who proclaim that they are nihilists, but make exceptions for things that have more than just a utilitarian value, who admit that there are a few exceptions for things they see intrinsic value in. Christians who believe in evolution, or even aliens, Amish who use machinery. There was an author AJ Jacobs who tried to follow every rule in the bible in it's closest literal sense, only to find that it is impossible in today's world. Personally I think that all major religions are so illogical and improbable that my arguments, and discussions rarely give them any consideration, but my piety in realizing that all I have for evidence is what my senses, and what the nature of our universe can tell us never lets me deny a possibility. If you have any experience in philosophy you already know that it is impossible to disprove a negative. So I can't prove that anybodies Deity does not exist. But if you are one of the certain people out there, why doesn't that rule apply to you? Why don't you realize that you can't prove Richard Dawkins Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist. All I have to say is that he exists outside of our natural universe and therefore does not have to adhere to natural law. There you go. You can't prove it wrong because you don't have the tools to do so. I will never try to say that Yahweh doesn't exist because there is no natural evidence for him. So don't try to do the same for any possibility. I believe you are all agnostic, you just haven't thought it through.
No comments:
Post a Comment