The New Atheism
Ok. So I was reading this article about the New Atheism, and I just have to drop a few words here about it. Couldn't pass this subject without making my own point, right? ;)
First of all, I believe in respect. We should respect other people's beliefs, being them ridiculous to us or not. I know it sounds funny talking about respect and referring to them this way, but I am not a hypocrite either. That is what you think sometimes when you're faced with a belief that makes no sense to you, even if you deny it.
I don't know where I am positioned now. But it's definitely an uncomfortable position, whatever it is. I have my spiritualist believes, which in moments of despair were all that I had. But also I have my passion for science,logic and my need for explanations. I believe that everything in the natural world has a scientific explanation. But, on the other hand, what is the exact extension of the natural world? I mean, when I think "natural world", what am I really referring to? I try to find more explanations.
Is it whatever it is touchable, concrete? Is it so absurd to believe in what science can't prove or disprove? Doesn't doubt give the right to believe or disbelieve, being it in the same proportion, 50 to 50%? Since you can't prove or disprove....
Does it make any difference, believing or disbelieving, or the existence of God or not? Shouldn't we be moved to good actions motivated just by noble feelings, rather than by fear of God or next life? But, if the fear of God or next life is the only or, at least, the strongest motivation to work on being good to the others, isn't it worthy to respect or have?
It might not be the noblest of the motivations, but isn't it worthy and, paraphrasing Machiavelli, "the ends justify the means" (well, I don't know if in English that is how it was quoted,but...), in the meaning of doing good? I want to make clear that I am questioning the use of the ends to justify the means in the case of doing good to the others.
Anyways, some of the New Atheists believe that you should attack faith, whatever faith it is, with the same non-tolerance of the fundamentalists believers. For me, that is bullshit. For me, they are just doing the exact same thing they disapprove: the blind belief in something that can't be proven or disproven. This is the essence of all the bloody wars human mankind has seen: the intolerance and disrespect for what it is not your own belief.
I agree with the scientific thought, scientific methods, but since they can't prove or disprove God and other life, how can the new atheists be so sure that everybody else that believes is so wrong? On the other hand, I also agree that people shouldn't be afraid of expressing their faith or lack of. And they shouldn't be disrespected for it - neither Atheists, or Christians or Jews, or Muslims or whatever it is. By doing so, the New Atheists are being the subject of their own reproval.
First of all, I believe in respect. We should respect other people's beliefs, being them ridiculous to us or not. I know it sounds funny talking about respect and referring to them this way, but I am not a hypocrite either. That is what you think sometimes when you're faced with a belief that makes no sense to you, even if you deny it.
I don't know where I am positioned now. But it's definitely an uncomfortable position, whatever it is. I have my spiritualist believes, which in moments of despair were all that I had. But also I have my passion for science,logic and my need for explanations. I believe that everything in the natural world has a scientific explanation. But, on the other hand, what is the exact extension of the natural world? I mean, when I think "natural world", what am I really referring to? I try to find more explanations.
Is it whatever it is touchable, concrete? Is it so absurd to believe in what science can't prove or disprove? Doesn't doubt give the right to believe or disbelieve, being it in the same proportion, 50 to 50%? Since you can't prove or disprove....
Does it make any difference, believing or disbelieving, or the existence of God or not? Shouldn't we be moved to good actions motivated just by noble feelings, rather than by fear of God or next life? But, if the fear of God or next life is the only or, at least, the strongest motivation to work on being good to the others, isn't it worthy to respect or have?
It might not be the noblest of the motivations, but isn't it worthy and, paraphrasing Machiavelli, "the ends justify the means" (well, I don't know if in English that is how it was quoted,but...), in the meaning of doing good? I want to make clear that I am questioning the use of the ends to justify the means in the case of doing good to the others.
Anyways, some of the New Atheists believe that you should attack faith, whatever faith it is, with the same non-tolerance of the fundamentalists believers. For me, that is bullshit. For me, they are just doing the exact same thing they disapprove: the blind belief in something that can't be proven or disproven. This is the essence of all the bloody wars human mankind has seen: the intolerance and disrespect for what it is not your own belief.
I agree with the scientific thought, scientific methods, but since they can't prove or disprove God and other life, how can the new atheists be so sure that everybody else that believes is so wrong? On the other hand, I also agree that people shouldn't be afraid of expressing their faith or lack of. And they shouldn't be disrespected for it - neither Atheists, or Christians or Jews, or Muslims or whatever it is. By doing so, the New Atheists are being the subject of their own reproval.
posted by The Lady of the Lake at 3:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home