Natural Born Atheists

An interesting short article from the Proud Atheists blog. Not merely a rant about the lunacy of the Pentecostal church with its unwavering message of "you're going to hell!", but picks up on the idea that there are people just born unbelievers. Religious indoctrination starts at such an early age that it is very difficult to investigate how, or even whether, the average human goes through phases of religious thinking and development. From the comments, there are a few out there who do not recall lapsing from any religion but rather have always been faithless skeptics.

As some religions would dearly love to find some 'God spot' in the brain, thereby connecting us mere mortals to some alleged metaphysical eldorado, so they wish to claim that we are all 'wired for God', thereby adding yet another lame metaphysical proof of God's existence. I mean, if you find a door then it must lead somewhere - building a door on a brick wall is slightly surreal but does evolution include such aesthetic pranks? I'll come back to this door in a minute.

So are people born with a natural sense of religion or are they just indoctrinated into their parents' cult? There are some for whom belief is just not part of the program. I, for one, do not recall ever believing the stuff spoken by priests. Not only did the words not mean anything but I saw how people behaved in both church and outside it and, apart from the rampant hypocrisy, I was left bemused as to what exactly they were doing. Kneeling down in a gesture of prayer was easy to imitate but what was going on in their heads?

I suspect - or perhaps hope - that most young children go through a process of thinking through who they are as their brain goes beyond learning how to walk and starts to focus on where to walk to. I also think parents do their kids an injustice by not listening to what they try to tell them about life, the universe and their dreams. I do recall having an intense period in which it was very important for me to figure out who I was, what was it that made me conscious of being me, and so on. I had nothing that could be called 'faith' in any great gig in the sky. I was the doubting Thomas - show me! However, the revelation that eventually appeared was very interesting and best described in Buddhist terms as naked awareness - a kind of atomic consciousness. Unfortunately, I knew nothing of Buddhism at the age 6 or 7 but I did know that such experiences were not part of the Catholic canon. My natural born faithlessness grew into a conscious rejection of the whole racket. Not only was Christianity wrong (people are wrong about many things all the time, it's called learning) but it was actually a lie, which struck me as a more serious charge.

So coming back to that door. The attempt by some religions to distort neuroscience into locating some God-terminal in the brain has already started. The structure of our mind is a fascinating and important area of research, both from a scientific and personal point of view. The structure of our deepest and most basic part of the mind is normally left unconscious and yet in some individuals under some circumstances it does manifest. Such experiences are often life-changing and hence should be treated with respect. In my opinion, the delusion propagated by religions is not the delusion of such experiences but in the mind-map propagated to explain such experiences. The mental door is not a gateway to a metaphysical deity but the opening up of previously secret areas of our mind.

Are we, in the end natural born fideists or atheists? We are undoubtedly conscious. We can choose to open those doors and explore our consciousness - explore what it means to be human - or we can get faith and close all those doors, lock them up and throw away the keys. Thankfully, those keys can always be found again if one starts to wonder about those locked doors.

Over 400 Links to Atheism v Theism Debates

For those who enjoy atheism vs. theism debates, here’s the most complete list you’ll find on the web (421 of them and counting). Please comment with additions or corrections; this page is updated often. The entire table is now sortable by any column, thanks to sorttable. (And it works and looks best in Firefox.)

See the recent updates. Also see my reviews of all William Lane Craig debates. My personal favorites are labeled as best! Debates are about the existence of God unless otherwise noted.

Great resource! Go to Common Sense Atheism.

Evolve Beyond Belief

This isn't particularly up-to-the-minute news but the tit for tat between atheist and Christian poster campaigns is gaining momentum. Those poor Christian souls obviously don't have enough propaganda draped outside their churches that they need to inflict their mind-numbing beliefs so everybody.

"We're supposed to lie down and take it and say, 'Jesus loves you,'" argued June Griffin, spearhead of the counter-Darwin billboard campaign. "Well this is payback time." Good to see these people for what they really are. They also cannot tell the difference between education and indoctrination. Their minds are so out of date as to need pickling in formaldehyde.

However, my main reason for writing this is to stimulate some really good atheist slogans. The "There is probably no God" on London buses was just really feeble. Much better is the Freedom from Religion Foundation's "Praise Darwin - evolve beyond belief." Actually, it could have done without the "Praise Darwin" bit as a tad to fideist for my taste. "Evolve Beyond Belief" would have been good on its own.

With the self-righteous venom spat out by evangelicals, and with the money that they extort from their sheep, I think we need more adverts and more books. Any other really good atheist advertising slogans gratefully received.

Ten Amusing Arguments for the Existence of God

The last few posts have been rather sombre affairs; not that reporting on the Vatican is supposed to be a bundle of laughs. So, to lighten the mood a little here are a few of my favourites from the Hundreds of Proofs of God's Existence. The list now runs to nearly 600 proofs, so needs to be read in bite-size pieces. So here's a taster:


ARGUMENT FROM FEAR
(1) If there is no God then we're all going to not exist after we die.
(2) I'm afraid of that.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM INTIMIDATION
(1) See this bonfire?
(2) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM AMERICAN EVANGELISM
(1) Telling people that God exists makes me filthy rich.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM SMUGNESS
(1) God exists.
(2) I don't give a crap whether you believe it or not; I have better things to do than to try to convince you morons.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM META-SMUGNESS
(1) Fuck you.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM POST-DEATH EXPERIENCE
(1) Person X died an atheist.
(2) He now realizes his mistake.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

CALVINIST ARGUMENT, a.k.a. TERTULLIAN'S ARGUMENT
(1) If God exists, then he will let me watch you be tortured forever.
(2) I rather like that idea.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM LONELINESS
(1) Christians say that Jesus is their best friend.
(2) I'm lonely, and I want a best friend.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM INSANITY
(1) No sane person could have thought up Christianity.
(2) Therefore, it must be true
(3) Therefore, God exists.

PEACOCK ARGUMENT FROM LIMITED VOCABULARY
(1) You use lots of big words.
(2) Therefore, I cannot possibly be expected to understand your refutation of my position.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

As I said, it's a long list. A great read that is both deadly serious and darkly funny.

20 percent of American atheists are religious

This is a link to an article written back in August 2008 on Gene Expression blog. You can look at the numbers there but the thing that is strangest is that only 22% of people who classed themselves an Unaffiliated also said they did not believe in God. I still think this has a lot to do with the fact that many non-believers just don't like calling themselves atheists. There really has to be a better, positive word to the lack of belief (there you see! It is even defined negatively!) I will return to this some other time. If anybody has a really good suggestion please let me know.

Science and Religion News and Resources

Below are links to news and resources on science and religion that I've found this week. Not all will be new but this is a way of storing them for future reference and before processing into articles. Will be posted once a week with additions made as the week passes.

Large minority of atheists are religious. if you look at this then the third column of figures is meaningless as it stands and should be divided by 100 to make sense.

U.S. Religious Landscape Survey from the Pew Forum

FreeThoughtPedia is a central repository of philosophical, scientific, scriptural, and historical arguments and commentary on the Freethought movement. Our goal is to provide a resource for those who choose to attribute greater significance to what's rational and logical, as opposed to irrational, superstitious, mythological and unproven.

Congregation of the Clergy. A Roman Catholic site for, of course, the clergy but interesting in that the articles are written so that priests can use them in their daily ministry, rather than being convoluted theological essays. The largest part is in Italian but a significant potion translated into English and other languages.

The Evolution of Religion, by R. Elisabeth Cornwell, PhD and J. Anderson Thomson, MD.

The Pledge of Allegiance to the United States is an article I wrote on how the Knights of Columbus lobbied to insert the "under God" phrase into the Pledge in 1954.


Anything you feel I should take note of then please leave a comment.

Atheism and Europe have Christian Roots claims Vatican in Osservatore Romano

The Vatican newspaper, the Osservatore Romano, yesterday published an article claiming that in Europe atheism has solid Christian roots, thereby trying to make the even wilder claim that atheism is a branch of Catholicism. However, the title of the article, "In Europe even atheism has solid Christian roots" [pdf], is also misleading in that the strongest message is that Europe too is defined in Christian terms and should remain purely Christian. The article is written by Pierre Manent and is also published in today's Vita e Pensiero. As far as I can see it is only in Italian - the Osservatore does publish weekly digests in English but it is uncertain if this particular article will be translated. Text in quotations are my translations from the Italian.

The article opens with the first of many extraordinary claims; that Europe is the region of the world defined by the conversion towards truth. As a statement on its own this sounds noble and the basis of philosophy and science. The millenial abuse of language from the Vatican should immediately make one wary of what conversion and truth actually mean here. Also note that this gives further ammunition to those who believe that the European Union is not just a peaceful expansion of democracy, peace and prosperity but the building of a Christian, or rather Catholic, superstate.

The next swipe comes against all other religions, with the claim that this 'conversion to the truth' is not only the foundation of Christianity, but that it is only Christianity that seeks the truth. "All other religions are obedience to the Law or the seeking of enlightenment." This is one more example of how the Vatican really sees other religions, including other Christian churches. It really does need to be highlighted over and over again - just in case Catholics and especially non-Catholics should ever forget - that the Vatican sees itself as a spiritual empire and that it will not rest until every single human being is baptised a Catholic. Participation in any inter-faith dialogue is purely self-serving and politically expedient in furthering conversion to the faith.

Going back to the idea of conversion to the truth, the atheist is thus on the same path, in search of the same truth. "Even he [the atheist] has converted when at the end of this search [...] he concludes that there is no God." Thus conversion is freely turning towards the seeking of objective truth. The atheist and the Christian are thus on the same path. The abuse of words now seeks to define 'conversion' as the setting off on the path of truth rather than the more obvious definition of conversion to Catholicism. For Catholics their religion is the truth, so the statement seems obvious but only to them.

This path involves a balance between liberty and truth. The author then laments that in our current society this balance has been broken in favour of liberty at all costs. No longer do we think of liberty in terms of the freedom to seek the truth, but rather the freedom to choose whatever we want just because we want it. There may be some truth to this. One sees very few adverts for wisdom and the stampedes towards the latest fads seem less than healthy. But let us see where Manent takes this line of thought.

The next target in the firing line is science. The current cultural paradigm of materialism, economic growth, product reviews, media hype and all the pressures to keep up with the times is a turning away from the true path. Manent sees this as a consequence of science, in that the scientific enterprise looks at phenomena without looking at the 'thing in itself'. "The knower does not have a relationship with the object of knowledge, and the viewer is not transformed by what he sees." The obsession to be entertained by external inputs is seen as a consequence of our desire to study phenomena.

The philosophical edifice of Christianity is exposed here, without the courtesy of explaining it to the reader, with its necessity to posit a 'thing in itself' behind every phenomena. This is not the place for a lengthy exposition on Platonic idealism or Hegelian metaphysics, but it is necessary to see that Christianity has to believe in the reality of metaphysical objects because its very doctrines depend on a metaphysical supernatural God. It strikes me that the belief and worship of a manufactured construct and obedience to the doctrines of the cult can be as much to blame for our culture's desire to be entertained by external objects and believe in the media as science.

The history of Catholic philosophy is one of struggle between articles of faith and Greek philosophy. The Church has been selective about which parts of pagan philosophy to absorb and transform and which to reject. In the discussion above it makes me think of Plato's Republic, where he talks about the importance and role of mathematics. Plato saw mathematics as having a dual role and possibly serving as a bridge between apparently disconnected human realms; the physical and the spiritual. At one extreme, mathematics is a useful and accurate tool in the service of science and technology (from the Greek techne). At the other pole the contemplation of its abstract nature can lead one to an inner esoteric world and to gnosis, or inner knowledge - enlightenment even (however bitter the word might taste in the mouth of Manent). Although what we call science has concentrated on the techne side of this continuum, it is thus possible to use the same techniques of experimentation and philosophy to look inwards. Indeed, such a body of knowledge and techniques exists in many branches of Eastern thought. The insult against Buddhism, noted above, is revealing in that the Vatican knows that at a philosophical and human level it is the antithesis of everything Catholicism stands for.

The final message of the article is a political one. That Europe is defined by Christian values and philosophy, by the freedom to take the path of (Christian) truth. That turning away from this path in the search of self-satisfaction and entertainment has also led to a political philosophy that departs from the true path. That the expansion of Europe is in danger of straying away from its Christian roots. This reference must surely be to the possible acceptance of Turkey, a secular state but predominantly Muslim, into the European Union. The Vatican message is clear. We are happy to expand Europe's spiritual domain by converting to Catholicism people in foreign lands but Europe's territorial domain must be clearly defined as Christian.

As this sermon is ultimately about the fate of Europe, why does the title even mention atheism? Perhaps, just as putting 'God' in the title of a book is sure to increase sales, so putting 'atheism' in the title of an article in a Catholic paper will increase readers.

The article is thus a thinly-veiled attack on many of the Vatican's enemies. The insult to all non-Catholics is the claim that Catholicism is the one and only truth. Therefore, anybody seeking the truth is actually on the Catholic path, whether they know it or not. Even atheists are on the same road but have lost the map. This is the very simple logic that Vatican propaganda uses over and over again. The apparently reasonable words are there as a foil to those who have not looked at Catholic doctrines in detail to see what precisely those words mean in the mouths of Catholics. As the Osservatore is the official Vatican paper it is mainly read by Catholics and they fully and completely understand the meanings behind words such as conversion and truth. The rest of us must not be misguided.