Couple of months before I started reading the book “God Delusion” by Richard Dawkins, I wish to be identified as a religious agnostic. On the words of Nagulan, while reading a book we grasp only those ideas we already have in our minds. So this book has really let the real me to surface from in the deep. I don’t want these words to be identified as a review, which I feel is a sheer insult to the original. I just wanted to share my understanding and interpretations from the book. Ideally the attempt is to break oneself from the hidden strings of religionism and open up the mind to accept and view the world in different eyes.
Before getting into Atheistic thoughts, it is much important to talk about agnostics (especially because I was one). There can be two types of Agnostics, first TAP (temporary agnostic in practice) are those who are not in an absolute state of mind and just did not find sufficient evidence (or sufficient time to find) to rule out concept of the religion and god from one’s mind. Second is PAP (permanent agnostic by philosophy) are those who is not open anymore to any justifications, which in fact is much dangerous absolutist attitude than theistic. This is a cat on wall state of mind which in any domain is not advisable to possess.
Now, Atheism!!
It is envisaged as an ideology that hurts others feelings, faith and belief. Actually theologians, whatsoever the religion is, have clandestinely intertwined religion in our existence in such a way that any subtle opinion against the religion will itself be abusive.
Atheism is not the loss of faith in religion. It is in fact the gain of knowledge about our existence based on logical and scientific explanations we have today. After 19th century, Atheism has had an a priori existence with Darwinism. But even among the educated lads (Theists especially) there is not even a basic understanding of what it tries to explain. Darwinism is viewed at as just another rival fundamental doctrine of its own kind. But like religion, Darwinism does not have any institutional set up (At the least not as highly funded as Templeton or ISKCON) and hence there can comfortably be a lot of misconception (many times funded by religious institutions) about it.
To steal the words of Oscar Wilde, ‘Truth in matters of religion is simply the opinion that survived. In that context there are four core reasons summarize here on why one needs a religion
· Explanation – To explain our existence in the universe.
· Exhortation – moral guideline
· Inspiration – source of inspiration
· Consolation – moral support when depressed
Let’s take on each one of these. Concept of evolution is a much better explanation of how we are here. Any theologian would be more than happy to readily point to one’s ‘Eye’, and ask “Do you want me to believe that such a complex organ is formed by chance (accidental aggregation of molecules)??? It is an event of very high improbability. Definitely there must have been a designer who does all these”. Well, he’s right and every one with a basic idea of evolution would also deny that but on a different context.
#1.1 - No evolutionist would even think about calling the development of different organs, a mere accidental conglomeration of molecules. It is a stepwise development guided by the nature depending on the need of the organism which again is governed by the interaction of that organism with the environment. We’ve overwhelming evidence of fossils that substantiates the linkage between different organisms on an evolutionary basis. One interesting argument could be something like this, how logical does it sound to claim that the fishes we see today are our ancestors? But the fact is that what we see as fishes or the primates today are just our cousins which evolved from something else like we did from chimpanzees (Our evolutionary neighbor). On a geological timescale, this makes sense and is definitely a much better explanation than having a GOD in all places where the question continues to be unanswered. As science goes on to explain it step by step the horizons of GOD is shrinking continuously and the singularity is not so far when the empire of god will be reduced to a single dimension.
#1.2 – If somebody is attempting to explain God by exclaiming the improbabilities of formation of complex organs like an eye, the counter argument could be, if creation of eye is such a highly improbable event then the creation of GOD who creates an ‘eye’ must have been even more statistically improbable event. In fact we are trying to explain unknown things with a much superior unknown thing than attempting to explain it scientifically.
As Carl Sagan puts it, the magnificence of universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle and more elegant. Let’s not insult it by confining it to square of confined thoughts
#2.1 Exhortation – No religious scriptures can ever be taken for granted as a moral guideline. For instance, let’s talk about Misogyny. Almost all the religion, be it Hinduism in case of widows law (1950s) or Christianity, in many scriptures (story in which a old gentleman offers his virgin daughters to save a pastor, who was after all a man, from the men of a sodomite village) and of course Islam which doesn’t need any citations have all shown their bare arrogant face towards women. But the sad story is that even women don’t realize that this is unjust.
#2.2 - Morality by itself is a very volatile word. Standards of morality are changing by itself from time to time. What was right (or at least acceptable) 50 years ago is an offense in today’s standards. So called Mahatma’s (Gandhi) infamous celibacy experiments with Manu (Nephew of Gandhi who was 12 years then) would be a matter of child abuse in today’s world. Having said that, how logical will it be to stick to millennium old scriptures preaching on what is right today.
#2.3 – For one to be good, to put it flagrantly for one to not rape or rob, if he needs a GOD, is it really a matter of moral guidance or moral policing. For policing, man-made laws are much sufficient. Roots of morality in human mind dates back much earlier than religion. Roots of morality must lie in the principle of ‘I scratch your back and you scratch mine’ and eventually would have extended to one’s kin to save his progeny. Survival of genes is the ultimate driving force of the evolution
Before getting to see the Inspiring and Consoling faces of the religion, it is essential to talk about the ill-faces of religion.
There are two biggest sins in religion whatsoever. First is the Abortion. Killing of Abortionists and bombing of abortion clinics are acclaimed as a religious duty by a sect of militant Christians in the most developed Northern America. Killing of fetus (not child), the nervous system of which would not even have developed to feel the pain, is a sin but not the killing of man (Abortionist) who has a family that he has to support. Those details apart, choosing to have or not to have a child must have to be a decision of the Mother who has to go through the most painful process of human life when giving birth to a child and definitely not the theologians.
Homosexuality is regarded as the supreme sin by the theologians. They go on to tell that AIDS is the punishment of GOD for the sinners. Well, what about the kids who get it from their parents. Are they sinners in their previous birth?? Stories are just connected and connected which eventually results in complicated spider’s web of religion. Religion has blindfolded us to such an extent that we fail to appreciate that sexual orientation is one’s personal choice as long as it is not affecting others.
Let’s not forget about religious wars that dates back centuries and still go on. Almost all the bloodiest wars in the human history have all got a religious origin.
Knowing all these one must realize that a true friend’s shoulder or caring parent’s love or a Loving partner’s hug are few, but definitely much better consolation than those with religious roots. Inspiration, by itself is a much weaker argument which either directly or indirectly can be abandoned completely with the above arguments.
Few other tools theologians usually take to counter Atheism is to throw limelight on those who claims to have been an atheist in past and turned theists realizing the truth and awarding (Templeton prize) the science men who make religious statements and the list goes on. But once the knots are undone, one can very well realize that all these are supplementary lies to substantiate the old ones.
Generally we never get a chance to contemplate on the matters of religion. We have always tried to keep it a matter beyond doubt backed by futile beliefs. But we fail to realize that thoughts of one generation become beliefs of next generation and eventually become a mandate for succeeding generations. Let us not pass on the torch to the next generation by tagging them as “a Hindu girl” or as “a catholic boy”. World’s majority (Monotheists – Judaism, Christianity and Islam) are all atheists for the numerous gods before them. We the atheists have gone just one god further. Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate for physics, sums it up beautifully, "Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you will have good people doing good things and bad people doing bad things. But for good people to do bad things it takes religion".
No comments:
Post a Comment