Agitation

[theatokos]

I am camped out at the neighborhood kid-friendly cafe. It's the nearest place with internet access and surprisingly, it doesn't suck. The kids are well behaved and cute; the parents are a mix of older, younger, Asian, black, white, moneyed, not so. The color scheme is chartreuse orange, purple and white. They have neat couches. I am, appropriately, perched on a large church pew.

erinya recently posted about Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion. Today, Adam got the most recent issue of Wired magazine in the mail. (Oh my god, a 5 year old boy just put on a bunny rabbit suit and is hopping around the play area. How can I be all cranky and agitated with such cuteness on the loose?)

Right. Focus. Wired mag has a cover article on the New Atheism. I'd like to link the article but the new issue isn't up on their site yet. I am vaguely familiar with some of the books that are out and featured in this article. I'm not interested in reading most of them. The premise of the New Atheism is that faith is unreasonable, delusional, and problematic to the point of being detrimental to society. To encourage people to believe in God is akin to letting people build whole lives on something as preposterous as there being a Flying Spaghetti Monster (an example used by Dawkins that comes from some other thinker). More atheists should speak up and evangelize the agnostic - yes, that's right folks, evangelical atheism! All of the examples of Christianity in the article were ones of out and out God-baggery: evangelical churches with their arm-raising, emotionally manipulative, militant ways. However, Dawkins' attitude seems to be as extreme as those he would disavow.

Whether or not God, or anything God-like, exists, I seem to be hard wired to believe and I hope to make a career based on religious ideas. I took the article to heart; I'm taking it personally. I wish I weren't. Then I would be a better, wiser intellectual, rising above my faith-stained heart.

To make matters worse, I spent time with a friend today, a friend I love dearly and respect tremendously. She is a scientist and thinks that atheism itself is just as a much a religion as any. I raised the topic of the article and of atheism, full well knowing that this could be a tricky discussion for us. She loves me, I know, and thinks I'm smart and all, but she still thinks that I'm fundamentally delusional for believing in God. I don't think I'm out of touch with reality. Often I wish I were more out of touch with it than I am. But my good friend does. Given the obscenely high IQs of my friends and the number of intellectuals, even scientists, in my circle of friends, I realize that it's quite possible a number of my good friends think I'm delusional. Obviously most of these friends aren't religious, few are believers of any sort or stripe. A very few are practicing, card-carrying Christians (and none of them live anywhere near me these days), but none of them are the kind that I guess the majority of Americans are. I rarely ever rub up against those that are. I may call myself a Christian (usually, quietly, under my breath, and in a closet somewhere) but I am more a Christo-pagan, a Magan if you will, than anything resembling a doctrinally correct Christian. Whatever that means anymore. I went to one of the most liberal Christian seminaries in the US. I think what I am delusional about is what Christianity means in America in this day and age.

And I'm really frustrated that Christianity, that Islam, that reason has been co-opted by God-bags and arrogant white men alike. I hate that extremism is the new intellectual fad.

I don't think I'm delusional. I think that I'm perfectly sane. (Except for the whole emotion-memory thing, but that's unrelated and fodder for a different post. So there.) I don't feel like I've been able to be even remotely articulate about any of this today. Oh well. There it is.

One last note: Dawkins' evangelical atheism scares me as much as the Taliban and James Dobson. I don't want to live in a cold, rational religion-less world, even though I am fully aware that religion historically brings out humanity's worst. I also think it brings out its best. Maybe I've read too many dystopias, or read too much about Stalinist-Maoist communism.

By the way, it's the end of October and it's pushing 80 degrees here. ?!

Comments

[erinya.livejournal.com]

Evangelical atheism is such a funny concept--not really funny ha-ha, but funny in the sense of counter-intuitive. I do find Dawkins' and other New Atheist's ideas interesting--especially when they point out that faith is not always a good thing--but I think that the most reasonable stance when it comes to God is agnosticism, because the nonexistence of God is as unprovable as Hir existence.

As for me, despite my doubts, I have always and will probably always be a believer in something, at the very least, for several reasons. From a practical viewpoint, faith is sustaining. It helps. Whatever power (whether its true nature is internal or external) I sense when I meditate/pray to/commune with Goddess is a fabulous guide. From a more subjective angle, I prefer to live as if there is a god, as if my life does possess some kind of intrinsic meaning. I suppose I'm kind of a faithful agnostic.

Long story short, I don't think you're any more crazy or delusional than I am. And I still think you should start your own church. ;-)

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

I really appreciate your stance - faithful even in your doubt. And you have been quite encouraging over the years (really, years plural!) about me starting my own church. Oh, I snicker just to think of it! But wierdly enough, last week the idea flitted through my mind with a bit more... construction, for lack of a better word. Some slightly more serious idea about what ministry might look like in my world. So, I don't know what that's all about, but you know I'll keep you posted!

[alizarin71.livejournal.com]

I've listened to a BBC interview with Dawkins, and I've read small snippets of his book online.

There are certain basic questions in life - how to get through it, how to find inner peace, and how to grapple with the infinite - that Dawkins comes at from the opposite direction than believers, or even quasi-believers. That inner voice of counsel that believers discern to be God's voice, Dawkins describes by its materialistic components. Likewise, when believers ask "where do we go when we die?" they think of Heaven (and Hell); Dawkins says, "I don't know - who knows? - do you know?? Let's not fly off the handle." In so doing, he refuses to start by assuming a mystery, and in fact he never acknowledges one -- despite whatever dimension of life he may be cut off from. By contrast, most people start with the mystery ... despite whatever lack of intellectual curiosity that may produce.

So I basically think his ideas are valid, up to a point, as another perspective on questions that could always use another perspective. I appreciate his being out there as a voice, and another book on the endcap at Barnes & Noble.

One thing that's weird to me: I read his book quotations on my go-to website for Daily Show and Colbert Report videos. It also has copious links to international news stories on the administration and Iraq. In short, the site is an outspoken voice for the Left. And here's all this Dawkins stuff alongside the political. The "New Atheism" seems often to be paired with the "New Left," as its "religious" component. In the face of the avalanche that is the Neo-Con Right paired with the the Religious Right, the Left needs an answer to the fundamentalists. Sadly, the Religious Left can't seem to find its shoes. Maybe they'll get it together; they'd sway the Religious Middle toward the political Left a lot better than atheists would.

They're all just voices, though. Dawkins has always been both strident and unfailingly articulate. I remember when The Selfish Gene came out (although I haven't read it), in which Dawkins claimed that it is our genes who are naturally selected and not us. It made a stir and won converts; but the book didn't change how we fundamentally think of ourselves, the way Darwin or Leakey did.

People who don't believe in God will call you delusional for believing. (Fuckers!) They come at the myriad choices and mysteries of this life from a point of view that doesn't require God, whether that is a sufficient approach or not. You're far too nice to call them delusional, or even evil, but most believers do (and worse). Regardless, I think this whole subject may present you with an opportunity ... Why are they wrong? What do you believe, and why? -- I'll think about it too, and maybe we can compare notes.

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

Nothing I've read or heard of Dawkins makes me think he is kind at all. There is one voice of the New Atheists that I'd like to read Daniel C. Dennett. I think it is good and wise to raise the voice of reason in these unreasonable times. But Dawkins comes across as angry and judgemental as the Fundamentalists. I agree with you that the Relgious Left can't find it's shoes. I attended a huge conference in July 2005 for what was supposed to be the battle cry of liberal spirituality. It was such a fucking Berkely politically correct love fest that nothing got accomplished. Drives me crazy. But I don't think Dawkins is the left's answer to the Religious Right; he is only the left's equivalent. We do not need more ascerbic divisiveness. I really would like to see believers of all stripes and creeds come together in a live and let live mentality. Maybe if more of the moderates would raise their voices..... Honestly, I just feel defeated when I try to think of solutions. It's so depressing.

Also, like Dawkins, I don't know what happens when we die and I also don't care. I never have. I have a few guesses, but that's all they are. I don't think it really matter honestly. My underdeveloped eschatology is a gaping hole in my systematics, but I just don't care. If we love God and one another only because it gets us an invitation to some celestial mansion, then we are shallow beings and undervaluing the active present love and wonder of this creation. I don't think I'm "too nice" to call others delusional. I honestly don't think it delusional to believe or not believe. What saddens me is how reactionary most people are to issues of faith. Too many people have been scarred and just throw up a force field screaming REPELL! REPELL! anytime faith might raise it's face.

But, on a happier note, I'm really looking forward to Adam and Lauren's Halloween party on Friday. I think you will be among the very few who will be able to guess who I am!

Also, thanks for such a thoughtful response.

[alizarin71.livejournal.com]

I should add that I, too, think you should start your own church. And somewhere in there you should tell me about this cafe that I might want to visit...

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

Cafe....? Cafe? Goodness, now I can't remember what it was, but some shadow of the thought is in the back of my mind.

[alizarin71.livejournal.com]

From your post, it appears to be the Tumble and Tea, at Telegraph and 42nd St. Just a guess ...

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's right in our neighbourhood! Telegraph and 41st/42nd.

[goddessofmercy.livejournal.com]

She is a scientist and thinks that atheism itself is just as a much a religion as any.

in some senses i agree. it seems to me that it takes just as much blind faith to believe there is absolutely no God, as it takes to believe in God. i'm sorry that the whole thing is making you upset and feeling like you it's hard to be intellectual and faithful. it seems that evangelism of all kinds is an international trend these days. i wonder why.

[hrafntinna.livejournal.com]

I don't have time to do it justice, but this is a very interesting subject. Personally, I'm an atheist, but I disagree with Dawkins that faith is in and of itself dangerous. I hold that True Believers are the dangerous things, and it doesn't matter whether the thing they are True Believers of is a religion or a political system or whatever. Moreover, much as I respect the intent of people hewing hard to the rationalist line (and I was essentially raised by such folk), I no longer believe that the Rational-Irrational binary is a sound one when it comes right down to it.

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

Hey, I got your message when I woke up Sunday, but I was still all *adlkfhjdifo* from Saturday. There was a fantastic review of God Delusion in the NYT Book Review yesterday. Did you read it?

Also, I'm so excited to see you this weekend!

[(Anonymous)]

I keep trying to write something about my view of this, but can't quite come up with anything that synopsises all of the issues surrounding religion and/or faith's detrimental effects on the world -- some of which we can all agree on, and some that are a bit more nebulous.
Personally, though, the extremes don't touch my life too much (although, they do seem to have their hands in the political structure of my country), i do find myself often coming up against an absence of rational thought that i think is endemic to faith.
So here i must admit to being the offending party in this scenario (or one of them).
And i also must ask for more discussion of the rational-irrational binary. For i simply see no other alternative -- any deviation from the rational seems, to me, definitively irrational.

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

Hello and welcome. Can you introduce yourself? What country are you from? And how did you stumble across this?

Also, just because you aren't religious and prefer the "rational" doesn't make you offensive - not in my book anyway!

[fictional-emily.livejournal.com]

apparently i forgot to log in
i suck
and apparently i'm a "fucker" -- thank alizarin!

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

Oh hi!

You're not a fucker, just FYI. You can alizarin in the shins on Friday. Look at us - starting a brawl! Woot!

I think the one glaring issue here is whether one thinks it is irrational to have faith. I suppose technically it is. But I find belief in a higher power to be as rational as not believing. I guess I find it irrational to believe that the Bible is the literal word of god and nothing else is. Mainstream and fundamental Christianity use a lot of circular reasoning and proof-texting and that drives me crazy. I'd have much more respect for someone if they said "I believe the Bible is the literal word of God, becuase that's the kind of God I really want and I agree with it all and that's what I like." But no.

As for the rational-irrational binary, good thing you can ask her yourself on Friday! What a party this is going to be....

[alizarin71.livejournal.com]

Oh, hey, Em! - Hi! I guess a person really ought to know whom they were calling a fucker, huh? ...You know that if anyone called you delusional, I'd call them a fucker too. Unless you'd been taking mushrooms at the time.

(I'm still digging, aren't I?)

[eelsalad.livejournal.com]

I fuss at myself from time to time about whether I'm delusional to believe in a higher power.

But then I remember that the reason I believe is because it explains the experiences that I and others have had. Heck, people have believed in the divine since before we had the written word. Given a choice between believing we are a naturally delusional race and believing that there is a divine Someone(s) out there, I'll take the later, thank you. It seems a simpler explanation to me, and Occam's razor is my friend. :)

Atheism is indeed a religion, as far as I'm concerned. I'd say that my beloved is an example of a true non-believer: religion just isn't on his scope, the way that, say, super-esoteric astrophysics isn't on mine. We both know that there are people passionate about these issues, and can sort of understand it by drawing parallels with our own experiences, but we aren't interested in getting involved ourselves. He no more has an opinion on whether God exists than I do on whether dark matter does.

[ewigweibliche.livejournal.com]

It's just that blasted God-baggery that gets people so up in arms, and can you blame them?

[eelsalad.livejournal.com]

Gah, God-baggery makes me want to bang heads. Srsly.

[alizarin71.livejournal.com]

Like Hrafntinna, I don't have time to give this subject the depth it deserves. But I am more on your beloved's end of the spectrum. I don't find comfort believing there is a great Someone out there. Given my life, I don't really find much reason to believe - I think everyone's experience is different.

Atheism like Dawkins's or P.Z. Myers's seems like a hard stance, if not a religion. I think Myers is reacting to perceived anti-atheist pressure in society. Regardless, atheism like mine seems more like an unwillingness to get entangled in messy metaphysics.