Posted March 10, 2014
I have been contemplating this issue for awhile. At heart, I've always seemed to know this but only recently have I become actually aware of this. I don't claim originality or anything, but I thought I would share my thoughts and emphasize on a few things that I don't think are emphasized enough either in fiction or education, our culture at large.
"I warn you... some philosophy's involved." Grab a bowl of tortilla chips to cope with what will inevitably gush out of your computer screen.
If the greatest friend to human kind is science (the definition of logic, reasoning, and understanding, meaning in Greek literally "to know") then I suppose religion is it's ultimate enemy, damning logic and praising dogma and gullibility and ignorance.
But really think about this. Let's talk about the greater implications of this seemingly obvious fact (if you indeed have dismissed this as obvious fact or non fact) Not pollution, not war, not poverty, not aliens, not the government, not anything else. Or at least not directly, as all these terrible things are usually the cause of ignorance and can all be fixed with an understanding and respect for reality.
Any progress or halt of progress or degradation of progress ultimately stems from religion and any kind of fundamentalism. So perhaps religion isn't the direct enemy of humanity, perhaps you can be religious and not be fundamentalist, or at least be a healthy low amount of fundamentalist and somewhat religious. I am atheist, because I believe letting go of god has made me a much stronger person, and has ultimately given me a lot of peace. Not agnostic, not unsure, atheist. Coming to closure on the issue was the right thing to do. If you come to closure on the opposite side, you are a zealot, and you are my enemy, and the enemy of progress. Even if you don't think you are, you are, by definition. If you are sort of in between and interpret certain things about the gospel that you aren't supposed to like the idea of the bible not being literal which It was certainly meant by the fictional god to be, then you are not a zealot and you don't completely believe in god, which means you haven't reached closure on either side. Again, religious people aren't necessarily bad, but not reaching closure on either side weakens you since you are at battle with yourself, so I think it is necessary to come to the logical conclusion that god doesn't exist. You will be a better person for it, and a happier one. I mean if we're talking Prometheus and Halo or Assassin's Creed etcetera and the idea that the bible is possibly a message from aliens, even though the bible could be technically partially true in some sort of roughly metaphorical way, it's still not how the would be god and it's ignorant and evil human creators intended it to be.
So fundamentalism is basically "I believe it is right therefore it is so." This is obviously a very bad mindset to have. When you confront someone with argument, they often don't listen wholly. They will miss things or misunderstand things. They don't know how to argue with themselves and deal with their cognitive dissonance. Some religious people have even gone as far as to say that reality is an illusion and that science is a hoax; "If the bible said 2 + 2 = 5 I wouldn't question it, I would accept it on faith." What they don't realize though is that they aren't special snowflakes. Everyone is taught wrongly that their feelings are above reality. The culture of mysticism and magic in movies doesn't do a good job of helping this. I once had a magic believer tell me "science can't comprehend magic, that is why so many people dismiss what they cannot understand." I tried to explain to her that, if it's beyond understanding, why the hell would you be so privileged to know about it? How in the hell could you possibly comprehend something that physicists can not? "God is beyond reality, that is why he defies all logical explanation." Well, if god is beyond reality, then he literally according to that does not exist. Such sweet, ironic poetry. He exists in the reality of the mind only. If you can't trust reality, what can you trust? Trust reality then, because it has proven to be reliable time and time again, unlike your unanswered prayers, and the unanswered prayers of many starving children.
Subjectivity is something that was hard for me to swallow for some time. I mean the idea that nothing is true, but nothing is false? "But those gays are... damn those.. ther... I jest... dey... well they're gay!! I don't know how my feelings are warranted because my arguments defy all logic but they are!! Somehow!" Homosexuality, regardless of how you feel about it, there is absolutely nothing you can say that isn't easily refutable by logic. Your hate of such things are feelings only, which can be let go of if you wish. Yes, even MLP. As much as you and I shudder to think, we really have little, at least obvious, reason to objectively deride their fandom. Perhaps we have more objectivity in arguing against their actual members and how their fandom either promotes or attracts people of such bad taste (sorry MLP fans... a lot of you I have found very distasteful, but I guess it's fair to say not all of you are). So why hold onto false objectivity of your subjectivity? There's no reason. Letting go was the greatest thing that ever happened to me. I can enjoy things more easily. I still hate certain things, be it videogames people ideas and movies or whatever else, but I know exactly WHY I hate these things, or at the very least I know much much more than a normal person would. I can come up with good sound reasons to argue against these things since I do not take the simple "that's how I feel" approach, knowing that is willful ignorance. I challenge myself to interpret the reasoning behind my like or dislike. Since I have a more resounding knowledge of why I like and dislike things, I can therefore be a happier person.
You know who else are fundamentalists though? Those who would stubbornly defend a controversial idea with simply "it's my opinion." You should not be so closed to discussion unless you know engaging in debate with a person or group of person's will end up violent or somehow very badly. But, just because someone raises good points against your opinion does not mean you can just suddenly claim your opinion is inherently correct. Perhaps it is, but it would be more polite to say "I don't want to talk about it anymore" rather than to imply that your opinion is factual simply because it is and the other opposing opinion is similarly not because it's not. Most people who do this are glad to spout their opinions publicly but then complain when others contradict them which is within their right to, and this is really what I take issue with. I want to clarify also that I do go to sometimes even GREAT effort to be open minded about things that I might even really really really hate, and even have good reason to. I'm finding the first witcher VERY difficult to play through currently. I'm finding it very tedious, and there are various objective flaws with the design and things.
So religion, is it really the greatest threat to human-kind? Well to contradict myself, yes, I think it actually is. It's the only organized cult against science itself. Since science is anti-fundamentalist and religion is arguably the root of all fundamentalism. Even if a religious person can do science, and can contribute to society, he is still chained down in part by religion, and chains others down consequently. A slightly heavy anchor is still an anchor.
I'm not without pain. It hurts to show somebody something as beautiful and talentfully put together as this; http : //www . youtube . com/watch?v=0jfU7pw76ZE
I mean yeah, nothing is true, nothing is false... to a point, but unless you're a masochist at some point it becomes blatantly retarded to try to not see how a certain way of doing things is at least more or less correct than another way of doing things.
How can (true story by the way) some fucking dumbass show me vines of retarded talentless fucks doing stupid shit and then despite having enjoyed it because I'm not biased I can still laugh naturally at at least half of them, think something like above is "stupid?"
Pretty ironic ending. I lecture about subjectivity and fundamentalism and demonstrate some of my own arguable hypocrisy. This is some heavy stuff I really wanted to get off my chest. Being in a religious family and living in Arizona means I don't have very many people I can actually discuss this sort of thing with.
"I warn you... some philosophy's involved." Grab a bowl of tortilla chips to cope with what will inevitably gush out of your computer screen.
If the greatest friend to human kind is science (the definition of logic, reasoning, and understanding, meaning in Greek literally "to know") then I suppose religion is it's ultimate enemy, damning logic and praising dogma and gullibility and ignorance.
But really think about this. Let's talk about the greater implications of this seemingly obvious fact (if you indeed have dismissed this as obvious fact or non fact) Not pollution, not war, not poverty, not aliens, not the government, not anything else. Or at least not directly, as all these terrible things are usually the cause of ignorance and can all be fixed with an understanding and respect for reality.
Any progress or halt of progress or degradation of progress ultimately stems from religion and any kind of fundamentalism. So perhaps religion isn't the direct enemy of humanity, perhaps you can be religious and not be fundamentalist, or at least be a healthy low amount of fundamentalist and somewhat religious. I am atheist, because I believe letting go of god has made me a much stronger person, and has ultimately given me a lot of peace. Not agnostic, not unsure, atheist. Coming to closure on the issue was the right thing to do. If you come to closure on the opposite side, you are a zealot, and you are my enemy, and the enemy of progress. Even if you don't think you are, you are, by definition. If you are sort of in between and interpret certain things about the gospel that you aren't supposed to like the idea of the bible not being literal which It was certainly meant by the fictional god to be, then you are not a zealot and you don't completely believe in god, which means you haven't reached closure on either side. Again, religious people aren't necessarily bad, but not reaching closure on either side weakens you since you are at battle with yourself, so I think it is necessary to come to the logical conclusion that god doesn't exist. You will be a better person for it, and a happier one. I mean if we're talking Prometheus and Halo or Assassin's Creed etcetera and the idea that the bible is possibly a message from aliens, even though the bible could be technically partially true in some sort of roughly metaphorical way, it's still not how the would be god and it's ignorant and evil human creators intended it to be.
So fundamentalism is basically "I believe it is right therefore it is so." This is obviously a very bad mindset to have. When you confront someone with argument, they often don't listen wholly. They will miss things or misunderstand things. They don't know how to argue with themselves and deal with their cognitive dissonance. Some religious people have even gone as far as to say that reality is an illusion and that science is a hoax; "If the bible said 2 + 2 = 5 I wouldn't question it, I would accept it on faith." What they don't realize though is that they aren't special snowflakes. Everyone is taught wrongly that their feelings are above reality. The culture of mysticism and magic in movies doesn't do a good job of helping this. I once had a magic believer tell me "science can't comprehend magic, that is why so many people dismiss what they cannot understand." I tried to explain to her that, if it's beyond understanding, why the hell would you be so privileged to know about it? How in the hell could you possibly comprehend something that physicists can not? "God is beyond reality, that is why he defies all logical explanation." Well, if god is beyond reality, then he literally according to that does not exist. Such sweet, ironic poetry. He exists in the reality of the mind only. If you can't trust reality, what can you trust? Trust reality then, because it has proven to be reliable time and time again, unlike your unanswered prayers, and the unanswered prayers of many starving children.
Subjectivity is something that was hard for me to swallow for some time. I mean the idea that nothing is true, but nothing is false? "But those gays are... damn those.. ther... I jest... dey... well they're gay!! I don't know how my feelings are warranted because my arguments defy all logic but they are!! Somehow!" Homosexuality, regardless of how you feel about it, there is absolutely nothing you can say that isn't easily refutable by logic. Your hate of such things are feelings only, which can be let go of if you wish. Yes, even MLP. As much as you and I shudder to think, we really have little, at least obvious, reason to objectively deride their fandom. Perhaps we have more objectivity in arguing against their actual members and how their fandom either promotes or attracts people of such bad taste (sorry MLP fans... a lot of you I have found very distasteful, but I guess it's fair to say not all of you are). So why hold onto false objectivity of your subjectivity? There's no reason. Letting go was the greatest thing that ever happened to me. I can enjoy things more easily. I still hate certain things, be it videogames people ideas and movies or whatever else, but I know exactly WHY I hate these things, or at the very least I know much much more than a normal person would. I can come up with good sound reasons to argue against these things since I do not take the simple "that's how I feel" approach, knowing that is willful ignorance. I challenge myself to interpret the reasoning behind my like or dislike. Since I have a more resounding knowledge of why I like and dislike things, I can therefore be a happier person.
You know who else are fundamentalists though? Those who would stubbornly defend a controversial idea with simply "it's my opinion." You should not be so closed to discussion unless you know engaging in debate with a person or group of person's will end up violent or somehow very badly. But, just because someone raises good points against your opinion does not mean you can just suddenly claim your opinion is inherently correct. Perhaps it is, but it would be more polite to say "I don't want to talk about it anymore" rather than to imply that your opinion is factual simply because it is and the other opposing opinion is similarly not because it's not. Most people who do this are glad to spout their opinions publicly but then complain when others contradict them which is within their right to, and this is really what I take issue with. I want to clarify also that I do go to sometimes even GREAT effort to be open minded about things that I might even really really really hate, and even have good reason to. I'm finding the first witcher VERY difficult to play through currently. I'm finding it very tedious, and there are various objective flaws with the design and things.
So religion, is it really the greatest threat to human-kind? Well to contradict myself, yes, I think it actually is. It's the only organized cult against science itself. Since science is anti-fundamentalist and religion is arguably the root of all fundamentalism. Even if a religious person can do science, and can contribute to society, he is still chained down in part by religion, and chains others down consequently. A slightly heavy anchor is still an anchor.
I'm not without pain. It hurts to show somebody something as beautiful and talentfully put together as this; http : //www . youtube . com/watch?v=0jfU7pw76ZE
I mean yeah, nothing is true, nothing is false... to a point, but unless you're a masochist at some point it becomes blatantly retarded to try to not see how a certain way of doing things is at least more or less correct than another way of doing things.
How can (true story by the way) some fucking dumbass show me vines of retarded talentless fucks doing stupid shit and then despite having enjoyed it because I'm not biased I can still laugh naturally at at least half of them, think something like above is "stupid?"
Pretty ironic ending. I lecture about subjectivity and fundamentalism and demonstrate some of my own arguable hypocrisy. This is some heavy stuff I really wanted to get off my chest. Being in a religious family and living in Arizona means I don't have very many people I can actually discuss this sort of thing with.
Post edited March 10, 2014 by JCD-Bionicman
