Sunday, 17 February 2013

Theist attack

It really is a problem. If you are engaged in the issues of the Skreeworld manifesto, of trying to establish who, what and where you are, you inevitably come to the big questions. The issue of whether human consciousness is the result of the brain, dependent on the brain, or if there is a soul existing independent of the physical, is bound to come up. We can't avoid it however hard we try. Such passion can follow. Without intent I have fallen in to argument with defensive theists where the obstacle can no longer be avoided. I try to understand why it matters to them so much, through ever more contorted arguments, through more and more questionable thought routes, against all evidence, the preservation of the soul is argued for. I never realised how passionate and how common the hatred of atheism is. My contention that the greater body of our understanding of the mind comes from Jewish atheist intellectuals, expelled from Europe, would seem obviously true. Yet with an enthusiasm that has enabled me to finally grasp how anti semitism works, I am told t hat this is untrue. That Kandel, Freud, Hodgkin, Katz, the list goes on, were Jewish may be indisputable. But their lack of belief in a personal god holds just as true. Theists attempt to reclaim even Einstein who would not simplify his beliefs to conform to campaigning atheist agenda. Nevertheless, any research quickly reveals what he held true. His belief in an objective reality upsets others.
Perhaps they think the Jews are killing their god again. Perhaps this last grasp at holding on to older human faith, a faith knocked first by galileos reassessment of the universe, further knocked by darwins revelation that we are animals, is too painful to lose. Many know, deep down that consciousness is dependent on the brain but still can not accept that all they do and think, the entirety of their reality is because their brain is alive and working. Kandel showed how neurons react and change to stimulus. How a simple organism developes habituation, sensitisation and classical conditioning. This is memory. The truth is hard for some to take. It is a small step to see that Jewish brain scientists have stolen the soul. Executed the final pillar of god. Some of faith really don't like this.
It is hard to develope any conversation on the mind with someone who will not accept simple truths we know about the brain.
There also appears to be a huge misconception that has inspired me to never use the term atheist again. It raises the hackles of some too much. Perhaps they assume that it is a belief system like Christianity or Islam. Perhaps they are unable to imagine what it is like to not believe. Atheism, as I understand it, is not a tight closed box. It simply means not believing in a supreme, conscious, creator. Otherwise the othe 359 degrees are completely open. The theist stance is not the polar opposite it thinks it is at times but a closed assumption of a fixed position of understanding. The atheist has only dispensed with the need of one further god after dispensing with Odin, zeuse and the pixies. Even then, I find atheism has become a slur hurled at those of us who are essentially agnostic. We honestly don't know what the fuck is going on we just doubt a god rules it all. When we take on the title it is akin to blacks reclaiming the N word, or gay reclaim of queer.
The issue has never been one I felt a need to fight but it is an obstacle in trying to develope ideas. Recent times have seen a backlash to the new atheism promoted by Richard Dawkins, Christopher hitchens , Sam Harris and dan den net. There has been an attack on science and an attack on reason. For this is the true polar choice. Not theist or atheist, but faith or reason. Rational thought with experimental tests to deliver evidence people can agree on, versus faith, beliefs on things without evidence, ideas having no basis other than imagination. The faith stance is a closed circuit admitting no learning or change. Reason is always changing and growing, developing ideas, disproving earlier hypotheses, offering fresh growth. The issue is under attack and I could do without the headache but I have to say where I firmly stand.

No comments:

Post a Comment