Does Majesty & Wonder Have To Come From A Creator?

in-the-shadow-of-the-moonI was in the mood last night for space stuff so I popped In the Shadow of the Moon into the DVD player. The film is a wonderful documentary (directed by Ron Howard) of the US moon landings. It begins, appropriately enough, at the beginning with John F. Kennedy’s bold challenge, and ends with the landings made by Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and a few lesser known successors.

You can view the entire film in 10 minute segments on youtube but, before you do, I’d like to call your attention to the final segment where some of the astronauts share how their journeys changed them. The segment starts with Eugene Cernan and Charlie Duke describing their feelings of wonder, and how those feelings convinced them of God’s existence (Duke actually became a born-again Christian not long after).

Being a fairly recent (2 year) de-conversion to atheism, I can relate to these men. I’ve shared similar experiences of wonder and majesty – most notably while hiking in the mountains, or going for 10+ mile runs (runner’s high’ll get ya every time). And, yes, two years ago, I too would have given credit to god for those wonderful feelings.

However, since the de-conversion, the source of those feelings has changed, and I’ve become more and more fascinated with the seemingly universal tendency for us to attribute these emotions to a god or creator.

Why is this so?

Some think it’s connected to our affinity toward anthropomorphizing – attributing human qualities to things that are not. In this case, humans create things, so we assume that the universe must also have been created by something human-like, only much more powerful.

Scientists who study the brain may tell you that our willingness to invoke god is connected to our ability to identify patterns. In this case, the pattern is that most everything we observe has a cause, and we extend that pattern to the assumption that the universe must also have a cause.

But is this correct thinking? Just because we see cause and effect around us, does that mean the same rule applied to the formation of the universe? If a god can simply exist, then why can’t a universe? Also, could the Big Bang have been preceded by a Big Crunch, and that crunch have been preceded by a different Big Bang? Might this process be cycling on eon after eon after eon?

And, even if the universe did have an external cause, why would that cause need to be an intelligence or a god? Might it just as easily be another universe, as multi-universe theory proposes?

And then there’s the fact that most of us were raised by parents who told us that God created everything, and many of us grew up in churches where everyone agreed the universe was created by God. How many of those people really examine these claims from authority? After all, all those smart people couldn’t be wrong – could they?

I wonder, if parents stopped teaching this idea to their children, how would it take long before our sense of wonder aimed itself at the natural world instead of some unknown, undetectable entity?

There is a world of science awaiting those who would ask these questions. There is a world of wonder awaiting those willing to entertain the idea that maybe, God didn’t do it. And, in my opinion, the fact that our universe came to be without a deity makes it even more wondrous and majestic.

crabmosaic

November 16, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, science, understanding, video

8 Comments 

Proof Not All “New Atheists” Are Condescending Jerks

Sure, we all have our moments (I certain have them) when we just want to grab believers by the neck and choke the belief system out of them.

But many of us also know how hard it is to shed one’s belief in god. The following post on Reddit does a far better job than I ever have of conveying this message. The bonus is just how many atheists chimed in to vigorously agree. Click on the link below to see for yourself.

Atheism vs Theism may seem like a battle of wits involving only science, and debate. The real truth is far deeper and darker than this, and anyone who considers discussing atheism with a “person of faith” should consider this: : atheism.

August 30, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism

25 Comments 

Is Richard Dawkins Right? Does Believing in God Make You Delusional?

richard-dawkins-god-delusionSearch for “Dawkins” or “The God Delusion” on this blog and you’ll quickly learn that my de-conversion to atheism was connected to those two terms. Of course, I’m not alone.

But, does being a Dawkins convert also mean that I think believers are suffering from a delusion?

Answer: It depends.

One definition of the delusion is: “An erroneous belief that is held in the face of evidence to the contrary.”

I’m guessing there are a few possibilities for that “erroneous belief” of yours:

  1. You have not heard all of the evidence. You might have been exposed to a lifetime of information from the believer side of the equation, with little to no exposure to the opposing viewpoint. In other words, you are ignorant of the arguments against your belief in God. You are NOT DELUSIONAL.
  2. You do not understand the evidence – a sort of variation on ignorance. The best example here might be that you misunderstand how science refutes your belief – perhaps you are a creationist who misunderstands how evolution works. Based on this misconception, your beliefs in creationism and god are based on that misconception. You are NOT DELUSIONAL. Wrong, but not delusional.
  3. You were raised to believe in God and have never really put much thought into it. God is sort of a default position that doesn’t occupy your thoughts to any meaningful degree. You are NOT DELUSIONAL. I think most people are like you.
  4. You’ve heard and understood the evidence, have put considerable thought into the problem and still believe in God. Sorry, but you ARE DELUSIONAL.

So, now that I’ve only got 25% of you mad at me, let’s talk about why you might be clinging to your beliefs so firmly – even “in the face of evidence to the contrary“.

  1. Belief is the lynch-pin of your entire world view: It’s known that, when their beliefs crumble, many fundamentalists don’t just abandon creationism, they go all the way toward atheism. That’s because the black and white all-or-nothing nature of their belief system leads them to reject all that they learned. Subconsciously, they know this, so they fight the evidence against their position tooth and nail. They are afraid that, if their belief system is wrong, their life is without meaning. (In contrast, when people whose world views are less literal have a crisis of belief, they tend to adopt even more liberal religious viewpoints. Some even become deists. Their religious views evolve, whereas fundamentalist views simply collapse.)
  2. You are afraid of death: Yes, I know – it’s a blanket statement that makes some people angry to hear, but the fact is that most people are afraid of death (or the death of loved ones) and will do everything they can to avoid letting go of their hope for immortality.
  3. Peer Pressure: Your family believes. Your friends believe. Over 80% of your country believes. It’s hard to go against the grain. After all, you’ll be an outcast – right?
  4. To all you atheists out there, help me out – what would you put here?
  5. I’m sure I’ve missed more than one reason. Please repeat the instructions shown in #4.

So there you have it. Some of you are delusional. But, you know, being delusional is not that bad. After all, many very smart people have been delusional about something. No one is saying you are stupid – just that you may have a logical blind spot. We also think that you have the capacity to reason your way through this. All you have to do is let go of your fear, embrace a more evidence-based method of understanding the universe, and try.

The rest of you may just need to do a bit more reading. ;)

August 27, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism

87 Comments 

Did Pain & Suffering Lead To My De-Conversion?

It’s been suggested that I became an atheist because I am mad/upset at god for the pain and suffering he’s placed on or allowed me to experience – specifically, that I am mad my son is diabetic, and that I’ve suffered from neck and back pain.

I’ve written about not being mad at god before, and I’ll say it again – I’m not mad. I simply do not think there is a god. Being mad at god would be like being mad at pistachio flavored steak sauce (please tell me pistachio flavored steak sauce doesn’t exist!).

That said, I will admit that personal suffering was part of the thought process that led me to shed my belief in god.

Before I go down that road however, it’s important to point out that my son became a diabetic three months after my de-conversion so there is no way his diabetes could have had anything to do with it (I can just hear the whack-os telling themselves that my son’s diabetes was my punishment for ditching god!).

—

Yes, I’ve put up with a lot of physical pain, but I put up with it for years without questioning the existence of god. It never even occurred to me to somehow blame god.

The real trigger was that someone very close hurt me deeply. I simply could not believe my eyes and ears how bad the situation was, and the questions started pouring in. “How could God let this happen?” etc etc.

But, as I examined my grief, a funny thing happened – I started looking at the pain and suffering of other people, and quickly realized that mine was nothing to complain about. It became obvious that, just by being born in North America in this century, I had a huge advantage over people born elsewhere, or at at different point in history. Want to know suffering? Just take a look at the shortage of food and medicine in some places on the African continent. Many people there don’t have a chance at health, happiness or longevity – only because they were born in the wrong place and time.

When Christopher became a diabetic, I was of course upset. But the “feel-sorry-for-myself” period quickly gave way to the “we’re-so-lucky” period when I realized if we were parents of a child in the Sudan, my son would already be dead. His diabetes only served to reinforce opinions I already had.

Side Note For My American Readers: I live in Canada and have EXCELLENT health coverage for my son’s diabetes! Our public health system is NOT nearly as bad as many seem to be claiming!

So, back to the topic at hand, the problem of evil and suffering led me to question my faith and, with no adequate answers as to why god would permit these things, it all quickly began to crumble.

Today, the problems of evil and suffering still factor strongly into my atheism, but not as strongly as the lack of evidence for god does .

I’m at a point now where there are just too many reasons to count when I say that I deny the existence of the holy spirit.

August 27, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism

18 Comments 

Let’s Talk About Evidence

Arguably the most common thing we atheists are heard saying is that there is no evidence for the existence of god. Just as commonly, we hear believers say that we must show evidence that god doesn’t exist (it’s at this point where you can usually hear an audible *sigh*).

Before getting into the backward logic of the latter demand, let’s look at some examples of evidence:

  1. Fingerprints and hair samples (DNA) are evidence for a person being placed at a crime scene.
  2. Fossils are evidence that extinct species of animals once existed.
  3. A photo of my wife and I kissing is evidence that we love one another.
  4. Observing the speed of different items falling (in a frictionless vacuum) is evidence that gravity has the same pull on items of different mass.

Sometimes, the evidence is convincing and easy to find. Other times, it is weak and difficult to come by (for Galileo’s gravity experiment, we need a frictionless environment). In science, when evidence is weak, we continue to push until we have more and more of it – until we have a degree of confidence that our theory is correct.

What all evidence has in common is that it demonstrates something about the physical properties of the world we live in (i.e. that everything is made of matter). Therefore, evidence must take physical form. It may be visual. It may be auditory. It may be something we can touch or measure in some physical way because, where there’s matter, there’s generally a way to measure it. The point is, evidence is more substantial that a thought that exists in our minds.

The claims of religion operate on two levels. At the macro level, we have the claim that God exists while, on the micro level, we have the claim that the Bible is true, and that Jesus existed.

What evidence do we have that supports those claims? Well, the Bible claims that there is a God. Outside of that, he seems to exist only in the minds of people since there has not, in our time, been any documented, verifiable, observable, physical proof that he’s around.

With respect to the Bible, where’s the evidence in support of its claims? I think to answer this question, it’s helpful to separate the claims into two areas:

  1. Its claims about the origins of the universe and life.
  2. Its claims about history – specifically, about Jesus’ existence.

With regard to claim #1, virtually everything we know about the origins of the universe (e.g. that it’s 14 billion years old) come into direct conflict with what’s said in the Bible (6000 years?). Most importantly, the knowledge we have is supported by copious amount of evidence. In contrast, the Bible’s evidence is that the Bible says so. A key concept used in the scientific method is this: When a theory is shown to have massive amounts of evidence that conflicts with a theory with no evidence, the latter theory is very likely implausible. This IS evidence for the non-existence of God – or, at least, for the god that is written about in the Bible. It’s also evidence that the Bible is deeply flawed. Given that, I think its prudent that we ask ourselves, “Why should we trust the Bible?”. I see no reason we should.

Aside: Even the claim that god loves us is bogus. Where, outside a thought in your brain can one find evidence for the love of an invisible man in the sky?

With regard to claim #2, again, the Bible runs up against a method similar to science. Historians test in specific ways when they evaluate claims about what happened in the past. Unfortunately, the Bible doesn’t do well when these tests are applied. Without getting too deeply into the historicity of the Bible, one of the best examples of this test is that Jesus is not mentioned anywhere in Roman records of the time. You’d think, someone of that importance would have been mentioned somewhere by the Romans – wouldn’t you?

Aside #2: I recommend reading anything by Bart Ehrman (you can also find some excellent videos of him debating believers on YouTube).

All this means that there is little if any reliable evidence showing the Bible to be worth the paper it is written on. And if this is so, what does it say about the claims about Jesus, or his father?

All this aside, the claim that we must prove the non-existence of god is ludicrous. It’s a claim that was adeptly brushed aside by Bertrand Russel when he conceptualized his “celestial teapot”:

“If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.”

___

I really can’t put a finer point on it than that. Besides, it’s late and I’m tired.

August 27, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

3 Comments 

Doubting Your Faith For the Hundredth Time? Church Shopping Yet Again? It May Be Time To Think The Unthinkable.

I remember when I began to have doubts about my faith. The world – according to Christianity – just wasn’t adding up.

At first, I tackled the problem by exposing myself to more religion. I attended more church, met more church people, and read more of the Bible.

Still, nothing made sense.

“It must be my church”, I thought, and spent another couple of years church shopping.

Things didn’t get any clearer. Seeing that God’s churches could disagree on so much made things worse. The world, according to the Bible, just didn’t add up.

So, I withdrew from church life. But I wasn’t done with religion. I was still trying to make make God fit into the evil and suffering within the world. I watched hundreds of hours of video and read countless articles on (what seemed like) hundreds of websites.

Still, nothing made sense.

Finally, after many years of this heavy lifting, I asked the unthinkable…

“Maybe there isn’t a god?”

And then I read and watched for another two months before I finally read The God Delusion.

In between chapters, I supplemented The God Delusion with even more articles and videos – this time with a heavy focus on debates between believers and unbelievers.

And just like that, the world started making sense.

Thinking about the unthinkable was – UNDOUBTEDLY – the hardest thing I’ve ever done. Nevertheless, I finally arrived at an answer that really made sense. There was no god.

Why was it so hard?

First, because in addition to letting go of god, I let go of my ideas around immortality. I saw my mind/my consciousness/my soul as nothing more than what my brain did. When my brain died, I recognized that my life would end and there would be nothing more. This, after 40 years, was an excruciating loss. There was a very real mourning period.

Worse, not only had I let go of my own immortality, but I also recognized the mortality of my family. In a very short period of time, I had to come to terms with one day losing my parents – forever. Even harder, I began to imagine what losing my wife or one of my children would mean to me. I felt such fear. Such sadness.

I was preparing myself for future losses in a reality-based way that I’d never had to consider before.

The permanent loss of loved ones was the hardest idea I’d ever had to deal with – I’m still amazed I was able to accept all of it.

Can you accept the seemingly harsh reality atheism offers? Why would you want to go any further down this path? After all, compared to what the rest of your life has taught you, what I am saying is pretty damn bleak, isn’t it?

In Brave New World, Aldous Huxley suggested that comfort and happiness often come at the expense of freedom and truth.

Yes, sometimes religion is comfortable. Sometimes it will make you happy. But, if inter-mixed and underlying that shallow sense of comfort and happiness, you feel conflict between religion and reality, it may be because you are doubting the truthfulness of what you’ve been taught so far. Accepting faith may also be impinging on your mental freedom to explore the real nature of the universe.

Comfort and happiness versus freedom and truth. Is that the choice? Not necessarily.

Since becoming an atheist, I’ve become free to think deeper about the meaning of life, and I believe I’m closer to the truth of this world than I ever was when I held a belief in God.

But, to my surprise, I am also much happier and more comfortable than I ever was before. There is no more internal conflict because the world finally makes sense. I’ve also gotten past mourning my immortality and am probably better prepared than most for my death, and the death of my loved ones. In fact, I no longer dwell on death at all (except of course to share these experiences!).

And that’s why you owe it to yourself to push a little further – to think outside the box that religion has put you in. You are seeking a melding of comfort, happiness, truth and freedom.

Is today the day you finally allow yourself to think the unthinkable?

August 23, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

38 Comments 

Why Religious “Objective Morality” is a Bunch of Balogne

An oft made claim believers make is that, without god, there is no objective morality. Meaning, without a higher power, we are free to make up whatever morality suits us, or the societies we live in.

I call bullshit.

  1. Someone needs to explain how god’s morality can be so hopelessly confusing as to lead to thousands of religions – some of which are in such vehement opposition to one another other (e.g. Islam vs. Christianity). If god’s morality is objective, you’d think it would be easy for religions to agree on what is right, and what is wrong.
  2. Specifically with regard to Christianity, someone needs to explain why there are so many strains of that faith. How is it that a Catholic’s moral code can be so different from a Protestant’s? Why are Jehovah’s Witnesses and Fundamentalist Baptists so different from every other faith? Also, why are each of these varieties of faith so adamant that their particular brand of Christian morality is the superior one (in answering this question, Christians need to be reminded that each competing sect bases its claim on an interpretation of the same book)? Why isn’t the objective morality of the Bible easier to reconcile within Christian denominations?
  3. With respect to modern/moderate Christian thinking, why has your religion’s moral code changed so drastically over the centuries and decades? Why was it perfectly acceptable to own a slave a couple of years ago and not today? Why was it ok to severely punish (i.e. beat and/or stone to death) wives and children for their disobedience then, but not now? How can objective morality be claimed when it has, in fact, changed over the generations? Is it possible that your Christian morality is already evolving in the same manner you seem to fear it will if god were to be taken out of the equation?

Objective morality that comes down from the heavens seems pretty far from being true. From my perspective, it actually provides evidence that much of what we call morality is subject to change. Further thought on the three questions asked above leads me to think that so-called god-based objective morality is, in fact, relative morality created out of a combination of:

  1. What culture you live in.
  2. What religion you grow up in.
  3. What point in history you are alive in.

Those three points can be wrapped up nicely into one bullet:

  • There is no evidence for god-based objective morality. Rather, evidence seems to point to a high probability that religious moral codes are shaped by us.

Just how morality is developed is a much (much MUCH!) bigger topic for discussion.

August 16, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, finding meaning, religion

10 Comments 

I’m Not “Mad At God”

I find it surprising that so many people assume the reason atheists are atheists is because we are mad at God.

The assumption is that we atheists are mad at God for permitting bad things to happen to us (e.g. the loss of a loved one) or, more broadly, that God permits such abounding evil and suffering in the world (e.g. the holocaust, world-wide starvation etc).

There may be some atheists who are angry, but I am definitely not one of them. The problem of evil and suffering is one argument I use to rule out the existence of god, but I am certainly not angry.

How could I be angry at something that doesn’t exist?

Most atheists rule out god based on reason and evidence (or lack of evidence). Any assumption that we are mad at him/her/it demonstrates a difficulty in understanding how our decision could be arrived at in this way. My view is that anyone with this assumption has let their own emotions color how they think others would ponder the question of god’s existence.

The assumption also arrogantly assumes we are unaware of our own emotions. Tsk, tsk…

All this to say I’m not mad at god. I have the same opinion of god that I have of unicorns.

December 18, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism

22 Comments 

What God, Ghosts, Santa Clause & Other Imaginary Things Have In Common

I’ve heard (mostly from Christians) the accusation that atheists tend to replace Christianity with other forms of spirituality. Specifically, I’ve heard it said that we often believe in paranormal concepts such as ghosts, witchcraft, telepathy and past lives. The implication of these claims is that an atheist who believes in unproven paranormal stuff has no business being critical of people who believe in god.

Point taken. However, becoming an atheist didn’t affect me in that way at all. In fact, becoming an atheist was accompanied by a rejection of the paranormal. Why?

The answer is that becoming an atheist was an outcome of examining evidence and arguments for and against the existence of god. In other words, it was an act of dedication to critical thinking. Applying that same process to the paranormal led to the same outcome – I rejected all of those things.

I remember quite clearly how rejecting god was like pulling out the bottom of a house of cards – belief in the paranormal came tumbling down as well. Not only was there no god, but there were also no boogie men hiding in the dark. I’m not saying I used to believe in the paranormal but, when I began examining god more closely, I also examined the paranormal and stopped taking pseudo-science seriously.

My world changed practically overnight.

The Reverse Must Also Be True!

I’ve been watching my kids grapple with the imaginary stuff of the world. They want Santa to be real. They fear monsters under the bed. They think there are scary, wild things in the basement.

Why?

It’s my fault. Our fault. We parents of children. We adults of society. We teach our children that there are things – imaginary things – around us that we cannot see. We teach them that fairies come while they sleep to take fallen teeth. We teach them that a big, jolly magic man slides down the chimney to leave toys. We teach them that there’s a white-haired old man in the sky watching their every move, listening in on their every thought. We teach them that there are devils in the world trying to hurt and make people do bad things.

All this. All this teaches our children to be superstitious. It is the building up of the house of cards I just tore down in my own life.

Every time we teach a young child that there is something imaginary that they cannot see – that they cannot ever see, it opens their minds up to be superstitious in other areas. We provide a doorway for superstition to stay with our children into adulthood. Frankly, I’m surprised people aren’t more superstitious.

Ghosts, God, Santa Clause, Satan and the Tooth Fairy are all attacks on our ability to be rational and accept only what can be proven with evidence and critical thinking.

If I got to start over as a parent, I’d eliminate every imaginary thing. There would be no tooth fairy (but there would be fun around the loss of the tooth). There would be no Santa Claus (but there would be presents and an appreciation for life’s gifts). Imaginary things would be banished in my home based on the notion that imaginary things do real damage to a child ’s mind.

Imaginary things impede children from fully growing up…

…and that’s only a good thing if you’re Peter Pan.

December 14, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism, family matters

18 Comments 

XTC ‘Dear god’ Lyrics & Videos

XTC dear godI trade emails with a group of co-workers and past co-workers. Today, someone in the group said, “God Bless Canada”. Another friend replied with, “What if you don’t believe in god?” (huzzah!) and then followed up with the lyrics of a 1987 song called Dear god by the British Band XTC (probably best known for We’re Only Making Plans for Nigel). I’ve pasted the lyrics below. Not only are they clearly and strongly written from the point of view of an atheist, but they write god without a capital “G”. A nice touch if you ask me.
—
Update: I went to submit this post to Reddit and saw the XTC Dear god video had already been posted on youtube so I’m adding that, as well as a Sarah McLachlan version.

Dear god,
Hope you got the letter,
And I pray you can make it better down here.
I dont mean a big reduction in the price of beer,
But all the people that you made in your image,
See them starving on their feet,
cause they dont get enough to eat

From god,
I cant believe in you.

Dear god,
Sorry to disturb you,
But I feel that I should be heard loud and clear.
We all need a big reduction in amount of tears,
And all the people that you made in your image,
See them fighting in the street,
cause they cant make opinions meet,
About god,
I cant believe in you.

Did you make disease, and the diamond blue?
Did you make mankind after we made you?
And the devil too!

Dear god,
Dont know if you noticed,
But your name is on a lot of quotes in this book.
Us crazy humans wrote it, you should take a look,
And all the people that you made in your image,
Still believing that junk is true.
Well I know it aint and so do you,

Dear god,
I cant believe in,
I dont believe in,

I wont believe in heaven and hell.
No saints, no sinners,
No devil as well.
No pearly gates, no thorny crown.
Youre always letting us humans down.
The wars you bring, the babes you drown.
Those lost at sea and never found,
And its the same the whole world round.
The hurt I see helps to compound,
That the father, son and holy ghost,
Is just somebodys unholy hoax,
And if youre up there youll perceive,
That my hearts here upon my sleeve.
If theres one thing I dont believe in…

Its you,
Dear god.

July 24, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism, video

1 Comment