Rebellious
Feb. 8th, 2009 09:31 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
poliphiloWe're not going to church today. There's still ice on the ground- and Ailz is afraid of falling- or of me losing control of the wheelchair on the hill.
Isn't it odd? I've been going to church for just over a month- and already I see it as some sort of an obligation. Do I think God will be angry if I don't go? Well, maybe, because that's how I thought as a child and we never entirely shrug off such things. Of course with my upper- adult- mind I scorn the idea. Why I don't even believe in God.
So why am I going at all? Is it because I feel I owe it to the people?
Here's something I haven't written about yet- or only hinted at. It's about feeling the need to choose sides. I've been getting increasingly annoyed over the past few years with what I see as the largely mindless embrace of atheistic materialism by the intelligentsia, the commentariat, by the sort of people who set the tone in our world. I don't mean David Attenborough- because his atheism is clearly part of a well-articulated, Darwinian world-view. I mean journalists, reviewers, comedians, actors- that sort of cannaille. They haven't thought things through or considered the evidence- how could they when they're so busy with their careers?- they're merely conforming to the fashionable philosophy of the day. They make me cross.
And rebellious.
Yes, I believe in ghosts/fairies/aliens/angels. Why not? Show me the evidence that they don't exist. In a quantum universe where over 90% of the matter that must exist is invisible to us I don't see how anything can be ruled out as too far-fetched.
The materialists are still working with a mid-nineteenth century model of the universe.
"What do you believe in, Johnny?"
"Whaddaya got?"
Anyway, that's one of the many reasons I'm going to church- to take my stand alongside the believers- even though their beliefs are not exactly mine.
Oh, and another thing I believe in is intelligent design. Not Genesis, not the Biblical account- which is plainly myth- but in the possibility that evolution is a process set in motion and helped along by intelligence. Yes I know that's not science- and I don't care. I don't think science- with its dogmatically materialist,19th century guidelines - is capable of giving us a full account of the universe.
Isn't it odd? I've been going to church for just over a month- and already I see it as some sort of an obligation. Do I think God will be angry if I don't go? Well, maybe, because that's how I thought as a child and we never entirely shrug off such things. Of course with my upper- adult- mind I scorn the idea. Why I don't even believe in God.
So why am I going at all? Is it because I feel I owe it to the people?
Here's something I haven't written about yet- or only hinted at. It's about feeling the need to choose sides. I've been getting increasingly annoyed over the past few years with what I see as the largely mindless embrace of atheistic materialism by the intelligentsia, the commentariat, by the sort of people who set the tone in our world. I don't mean David Attenborough- because his atheism is clearly part of a well-articulated, Darwinian world-view. I mean journalists, reviewers, comedians, actors- that sort of cannaille. They haven't thought things through or considered the evidence- how could they when they're so busy with their careers?- they're merely conforming to the fashionable philosophy of the day. They make me cross.
And rebellious.
Yes, I believe in ghosts/fairies/aliens/angels. Why not? Show me the evidence that they don't exist. In a quantum universe where over 90% of the matter that must exist is invisible to us I don't see how anything can be ruled out as too far-fetched.
The materialists are still working with a mid-nineteenth century model of the universe.
"What do you believe in, Johnny?"
"Whaddaya got?"
Anyway, that's one of the many reasons I'm going to church- to take my stand alongside the believers- even though their beliefs are not exactly mine.
Oh, and another thing I believe in is intelligent design. Not Genesis, not the Biblical account- which is plainly myth- but in the possibility that evolution is a process set in motion and helped along by intelligence. Yes I know that's not science- and I don't care. I don't think science- with its dogmatically materialist,19th century guidelines - is capable of giving us a full account of the universe.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 11:14 am (UTC)I *do* have trouble with the notion of ID, although less for the idea itself and more for the pernicious way many of its believers try to force it to be taught along side evolution in the schools. I believe in science. I don't think that believing in God contradicts the need and obligation to explore the rules of the world in a wide awake fashion.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 12:21 pm (UTC)I believe in science too. ID belongs to the realm of philosophy or theology- and has no place in the science curriculum.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 12:03 pm (UTC)I believe in intelligent design too. I think of the Genesis account as a myth that is "true" in some Mysterious sense but not literally. I disagree with the lunatics who want ID taught in science classes -- but on the other hand, I disagree with the other side that wants religion excluded from schools entirely. Like I said above, I think we need it. If nothing else, we pretty desperately need the humility that good religion ought to teach us.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 12:29 pm (UTC)Religion should be taught in schools- if only as an integral part of human history.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 12:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 12:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 12:58 pm (UTC)I'm not sure I like the phrase "intelligent Design" because it puts a picture in my mind of God As Behavioural Psychologist with the earth as his Great Maze and Humans as lab rats, but I don't for a momet believe that all this has happened completely randomly, either. It's also a phrase that in this country has become associated with evangelical fundamentalism, which I have very little patience with.
And I haven't seen the word cannaille since I was preparing for the SATs in 1978. Thanks for reminding me of it.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 02:53 pm (UTC)Sometimes the right word is the French word- especially when one is curling one's lip in elegant scorn.
What I tell people is...
Date: 2009-02-08 07:08 pm (UTC)Re: What I tell people is...
Date: 2009-02-08 07:33 pm (UTC)Re: What I tell people is...
Date: 2009-02-08 08:07 pm (UTC)Re: What I tell people is...
Date: 2009-02-08 08:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 06:08 pm (UTC)(Jennie the Sealyham Terrier, in Maurice Sendak's Higgelty-Piggelty-Pop")
Something I've firmly believed for a long time, by the way.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 08:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 10:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 06:54 pm (UTC)Here in the United States, atheistic materialism seems to be the unspoken creed, especially among the well-to-do, politicians, talking heads and intellectuals. They pay lip service to various creeds and faiths, and then tend to act like atheists otherwise.
I agree that science is incapable of giving us a full account of the universe - inner or outer. Working in the mental health field it quickly becomes apparent how much of our inner space, however well mapped by x-rays and MRI, is unknown territory.
A guy I feel kin to a lot these days is from your neck of the woods - William Blake. He too was unsatisfied with pseudoscientific, atheist materialism, and he saw acutely the difference between the lipservice paid to faith in his day and the actions of those in power.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 07:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 08:12 pm (UTC)"Mock on, mock on, Voltaire, Rousseau,
Mock on, mock on, 'tis all in vain.
You throw the sand against the wind-
And the wind blows it back again.
The atoms of Democritus
And Newton's particles of light
Are sand upon the Red sea shore
Where Israel's tents do shine so bright."
And that's from memory.....
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 07:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 08:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 07:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 08:23 pm (UTC)I'll keep on posting about this stuff- as it arises. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 08:16 pm (UTC)This is what I carry with me daily. I love your search, your openness, your philosophy. There are so many variables. We have to be true to ourselves.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 08:26 pm (UTC)"we have to be true to ourselves." Yes. Absolutely!
no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 10:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-09 11:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-09 01:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-10 02:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 10:45 pm (UTC)I'm afraid I tend to believe, most of the time, that we are all living in a random bubble caused by the splitting up of nothingness into matter and anti-matter, who knows how or why...
Ascribing life and its diversity to an anthropomorphic God is caused by a limitation of the human brain, which evolved to live in social heirarchies. God is the Tribal Chief to top all Tribal Chiefs IMHO.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-09 11:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-08 11:12 pm (UTC)I'm of the opinion that life is far more interesting if you're willing to be open minded about such things. A life without ghosts and ghost stories and legends? How incredibly dull!
no subject
Date: 2009-02-09 12:39 am (UTC)Very little about this life can be known completely; to think anything less is either hubris or delusion.
Science used to be about the quest. Now it is about control. Not about being the one who seeks to know, but about being the one who knows.
Very different things.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-09 11:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-09 11:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-09 05:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-09 11:24 am (UTC)I love disagreeing too.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-09 01:43 pm (UTC)I must say that while I see abundant evidence for the Darwinian viewpoint, I see no evidence for God as represented in the world's religions at all. I see magical thinking, I see unsubstantiated assertion.... God always seems to me, either to loom like a bully, or is so very insubstantial that he is always a wisp out of reach.
His claims to benificence are , at best, arguable. He seems to have hearing problems, perhaps caused by the din of conflicting prayers.
I do see that it can motivate great works of art and great feats of kindness and unselfishness, but I think these extraordinary expressions have their origin in the human mind and imagination, as are the acts of cruelty and bigotry perpetrated so frequently in religion's name.
I see faith as a kind of wishful thinking. I don't claim to know everything I just don't see God lurking in the fog of in what I don't know.
I certainly don't have some idea of humanity as "supreme" in the universe ... I see it as part of nature, a part privileged and burdened by the rare gift of self-consciousness. I see this gift growing out of our evolutionary history and as coming with moral responsibilities of our own devising attached.
For me, (and I think I've explained to you my extremely negative experiences with theistic religion in the past), I think religion is like smoking, I have to avoid it or I might, to my detriment, relapse.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-10 02:15 pm (UTC)In the end I don't think it matters what we believe- except insofar as it influences the way we behave. Isn't there some recent research that suggests that religiosity is something we're gentically programmed for?
I don't have good arguments for my belief- because I don't reckon there are any. It's not really a matter of intellectual conviction- much more to do with emotion and aesthetics- and all that woo-woo stuff.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-10 09:36 am (UTC)I think it can all be quantified, or let me amend that to say 'could'. Right now we have no way of doing it. In fact, to do it we'd probably need a computer just as big and complex as the Universe itself, because the Universe is basically a massive computer constantly jotting out it's lines of fate and Brownian motion. It's all random, but if you know all of the facts, then nothing is random.
Probably the best we'll get to then is very good models. Even understanding ourselves, we're part of a mega-complex labyrinth of DNA and jumbled ideas, blurring with chemicals and seemingly random interactions. It's sufficiently complex to allow for belief in just about anything to never be disproved or proved.
Ghosts and monsters etc, sure, why not. I don't think they're real, as I don't believe in ID, but have no proof either way, the same for everyone- so what does it matter? You take what you want. I'm increasingly coming to think we'll be in post-faith days soon. You can believe or not, but it won't matter, as increasingly whether you're gay or not, black or not, will come to matter less and just be another characteristic- as in, people won't use it to identify themselves.
Iain Banks writes about a post-faith culture, called 'the Culture', in which the greatest good is hedonism and works of amazing scale and beauty. Humans become god-like in their capacity to create stellar architecture, massive worlds, manipulate light and time and etc.. I think that's a great goal, and probably where we're headed.
A for Dawkins and Bill Maher and others- they're in it for the personal glory of being a rebel, basically putting out a fundamentalist message to counter that put out by other fundamentalists. I listen to his lot now about as much as I listen to any religious person. None of them really know, so why sweat it?
no subject
Date: 2009-02-10 03:01 pm (UTC)I view religion as an interest or hobby. Some of us enjoy it and some of us don't. It's like trainspotting or piano-playing. For that reason I don't suppose it's likely to die out anytime soon. The mistake- of which both the Pope and Bill Maher are guilty- is to take belief seriously. Morality is serious, aesthetics is serious; belief- except as it impinges on morality and aesthetics- is trivial.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-10 08:07 pm (UTC)Fuckin ausome
love joe
no subject
Date: 2009-02-11 10:23 am (UTC)A bedtime story- like Father Brown, eh?
Love,
Dad