the evolutionary path to atheism
People in all societies throughout time have had superstitious belief systems to explain the unexplainable. Every Christian I think would agree that the Mayan gods were a primitive attempt to understand life and death in the absence of a message from the god God. Every Muslim I think would agree that the Egyptian gods were a primitive attempt to understand life and death in the absence of a message from the god Allah. You get the picture.
As we totter along on our human journey, finding out more about ourselves, about the world and about the universe beyond, there is a trend towards concluding that we no longer need a superstitious belief system to explain the unexplainable. In highly scientific professions (i.e. people who understand a lot more about the mechanics of the universe than the rest of us) numbers of those still believing in deities are remarkably low. Many of us in the general population are coming to the conclusion that the messages that any number of these deities are purported to have brought to humanity, have a familiar and common ring of ‘man-made’ shimmering from every word in their holy texts. There is no way to separate one belief system from the next. And no reason to think that any of these many invisible deities worshipped across the world, and across time, actually exist.
So, in 2013, the common trend is people with higher levels of education moving away from the traditionally held religious beliefs of their culture. I can say with utter confidence at this point in time, that there is no reason to believe in the supernatural, no reason to believe any gods exist and no reason to follow the default religion of my culture, or another that looks more interesting. What seems more likely to me is that some key characteristics of our animal nature have led us to imagine life and power beyond what we see, and cluster round developing supernatural beliefs and organised religions that we are exposed to in our cultures.
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves, let’s not get too comfortable or arrogant with what we understand, for we are not at the end of an evolutionary path. And surely in 3013, future generations will be laughing about how little we currently understand.
You’re absolutely right about how little we understand. As for man’s beliefs in the Divine, they are mostly just that – beliefs, inventions of our curious minds as Voltaire said. However, great minds like Gandhi and Plato insisted that a Divine Power existed. Of course, they were not talking about a Divine Power taught by any religion known to man. They felt that the Universe/Nature was not explainable except through some concept of a higher intelligence. Albert Einstein described this perfectly when he said, “I believe in Spinoza’s God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists” and “Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe – a spirit vastly superior to that of man….” Maybe we shouldn’t wait until 3013 to have a good laugh.
LikeLike
It’s an interesting perspective but I’m quite serious that I don’t think we can logically believe in anything supernatural, because we exist now, and there’s no evidence. I guess the point of the post was to consider that ‘now we have the answer’ will never be true.
LikeLike
3013. That’s actually remarkably hard to imagine.
LikeLike
The ipads will be completely different! 🙂
LikeLike
Sure will… they’ll store you’re entire consciousness.
LikeLike
Although it is true that many ancient peoples tried to attribute to a god or gods certain phenomena that we now understand through science, I think it’s overreaching to say that this historical process will eliminate in the future all belief and experience of a power beyond our own minds.
There are still some big mysteries out there that I’m sure you’re aware of – namely the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and dark energy and matter. And I’m not saying that these phenomena point directly to God. I’m just saying that they remain as mysterious in 2013 as they did in 1013, and they may be just as much out of the reach of science in 3013.
I don’t know if you deliberately meant to follow my post with yours today on the Evolution feed, or if it was just a coincidence. If it was just a coincidence, it was one of those serendipitous ones. I have struggled with many of the observations you have sited. And I have arrived at a worldview that reconciles (for me) many of the conflicts between science and matters of faith, between our post-modern understanding of things and the activity of a Higher Power (or God).
This worldview had been aided by two phenomena – direct encounters with a powerful presence of extreme love (occurring mostly during times of personal crisis) and a new philosophy I developed that was arrived at independently of what I had ever heard or read about God.
I would like for you to consider visiting my website at revolutionarynewphilosophy.com. There I have posted the entire contents of my book ~SOUNDINGS~: Exploring the Depths of God and the Universe, which explains the dynamics of this philosophy.
I would never try to convince anyone to believe something just because I believe it. I just want to share with you something that works for me.
A fellow traveler,
Frank L. Jordan III
LikeLike
”This worldview had been aided by two phenomena – direct encounters with a powerful presence of extreme love (occurring mostly during times of personal crisis)”
It is so depressingly familiar to be be almost cliche that converts seem to find the Lord when in the depths of despair.
Why is that? Why can’t god turn up while I am sitting on the toilet or toasting some bread?
I can honestly say I have been through a few rough patches that I don’t feel the need to discuss but no god turned up and said, “Oi, Ark, let me give you a hand there my old son.”
‘I would never try to convince anyone to believe something just because I believe it. I just want to share with you something that works for me.”
“That’s just what Jesus said”. With apologies to the cast of Life of Brian.
Oh, and please, please don’t share, and ESPECIALLY not with children. They deserve a chance not to be poisoned with this garbage. Rather just keep ot to yourself, okay?
LikeLike
“converts seem to find the Lord when in the depths of despair. Why is that?” I think it’s a defense mechanism that kicks in for survival. We become children again looking for parental love or protection. Invisible deities are socially acceptable psychological comforters for adults. (The fact the Christian god in their Bible doesn’t seem that comforting seems neither here nor there)
LikeLike
Oh, i like that
LikeLike
Thanks for commenting. It makes me realise I must have been terribly unclear in my wording. As I mentioned above in another comment, I meant to convey the idea that ‘now we have the answer’ will never be true. I find it odd that so many people throughout time believe the answer/understanding is personally revealed to them. We are very self-absorbed creatures.
LikeLike
I think it would be wrong to say we are as close to the answer now as then. We know leaps and bounds more about the universe, how it may have began, etc etc. There are still great mysteries, but it is unfair to equate the knowledge like that.
LikeLike
Martin Luther made the best case for atheism: “… reason is the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things.”
An image recently posted on Facebook featured a pastor in the upper left-hand corner and a scientist in the lower right. With the pastor went the caption: “I don’t know. Therefore, God!” With the scientist: “I don’t know. Let’s find out!” And below: “Science: because reality is too interesting to be content with ignorance.”
Having survived a fundamentalist Christian upbringing, it’s amazing now to think how religious people blind themselves to their own atheism concerning other deities. Billions of Hindus have meaning and purpose in the Bhagavad Gītā, other Vedic scriptures and prayers for millennia, yet a collection of scribblings by a barbaric tribe of xenophobic shepherds two thousand years ago is the only true revelation of the One True God? It’s absolutely stunning.
LikeLike
I agree, it’s bizarre how many religious people recognise what you’re saying but just can’t relate it to their own religion. It shows how deep the desire for religious comfort is, and how difficult it is to remove the thought patterns once they’re embedded. But I guess it’s obvious to say that the mark of a successful religion is one that traps people with hope or fear – or rather a combination of the two.
LikeLike
Do you think that there really is some kind of genetic marker for religious thinking and belief, or is it all nurture?
LikeLike
I would assume it’s a natural to all of us. John Zande puts it down to paranoia and fear – instincts that kept us alive in more primitive settings. I think curiosity is a big part of it as well – we only progress and thrive if we’re curious (look at any toddler), and if we can’t find answers, we’re keen to make them up. Enter invisible forces. I guess now we have enough information that we don’t need to look to any supernatural for answers, and many of us don’t. The nurture aspect just introduces us to whatever belief system has been developed in our culture. What do you think?
LikeLike
As someone who was raised without a religion, I tend to believe it’s brain washing, or what you more politely call nurture. Since human children are dependent for such a long time, it’s hard to speculate on what natural conclusions might be to poorly understood phenomenon. Since we do have a tendency to anthropomorphize animals and all sorts of things we don’t fully understand, it wouldn’t surprise me to find people anthropomophizing the weather and all sorts of other things. However a fully developed religion seems to go much further than that. If it weren’t for organized religion, thinking that spirits controlled the weather or the seasons would simply be an incorrect hypothesis that we would be happy to exchange for a better one once we find it. So why aren’t religious people absolutely thrilled when the “god of the gaps” gets pushed into smaller and smaller corners of reality? Because religion isn’t about asking questions. It’s about power and control.
Whenever religious people try to convert me, they almost always start with beautiful sounding abstract things like, “God is love.” When I was younger and more naive, I used to listen to them, at least until they tipped their hand about what they really wanted. Ultimately, their end goal is always to tell me how to live and to get me putting money in the collection plate for that dubious priviledge.
Aristotle had some highly inaccurate notions about the natural world, but it wasn’t a sin to progress beyond his ideas because they weren’t religious ideas. That’s the difference between science and religion. It’s not that scientific ideas are right, but that they can be found to be wrong. If someone came up with a better explanation for how different species came to be on this earth than Darwin’s explanation, we’d all be thrilled. If a better explanation than the big bang were to come around that would be great. In 3013, I’m sure they’ll think some of our ideas today are quaint. But they would probably regard our ideas the way we regard Aristotle’s, not the way we regard the Bible.
LikeLike
Thanks Fojap, really good points. I guess there is a big difference between blinkered ignorance based on blind faith in mad-made religions, and ignorance due to lack of evidence available at a particular point in time.
LikeLike
Actually, everyone already believes in God. http://pastorjamesmiller.com/2013/06/27/everyone-believes/
LikeLike
Hmmm. The trouble with your post is that most of us foolish atheists actually wouldn’t say “God does not exist.” Rather, we more accurately say that there is not enough evidence to support belief in the existence of God (and, specifically, *your* particular version of one particular god out of the millions of gods that humans have believed in over thousands of years).
And we don’t know that our perceptions of the world and the universe are accurate. This is why we measure them using the tools of science to verify and test our observations. The rational worldview begins with observation and draws its conclusions from the verifiable evidence that has been collected. Religion does the opposite, wherein it starts with a conclusion and then works backwards to find supporting evidence.
The invisible and the non-existent often look very much alike. And a deity that chooses to work in “mysterious” ways that mask all evidence of its existence is more likely to be a construct of the human imagination to explain what we didn’t understand once upon a time than it is an all-powerful being that chooses to selectively intervene in human affairs – usually for middle-class white people, and less likely for sub-Saharan African babies riddled with malaria.
LikeLike
Delightful. Pastor James Miller pops in to advertise his blog – and his inability to see through the logical arguments against his flawed beliefs. As we’ve seen this before, I won’t be surprised when you fail to engage with points made against you and scamper back under your logic impervious rock. Thanks for dropping by!
LikeLike
You are wrong pastor and your post shows how wrong you are.
LikeLike
@ Pastor James.
Lol…One small step away from being a Silly person.
For now you are merely a Dickhead.
LikeLike
LOL. Pastor Miller’s post is a brilliant example of the non-cognitivist position it espouses, just not in the way he thinks it is…
LikeLike
Pingback: Everyone believes: No, you are mistaken! | Random thoughts
“People in all societies throughout time have had superstitious belief systems”
I think the Atheists have also been superstitious; when the believers in the truthful religion believed the Earth was flat ; the same way the Atheists believed; they were no different.
LikeLike
I’m not sure what you’re saying here. Believing the earth is flat before you have any evidence to tell you otherwise isn’t superstition. It’s only superstitious if you think a supernatural force made the earth flat.
LikeLike
That is simply a misunderstanding of the Atheists and their likes; Quran does not mention Earth to be flat; it is not a subject of religion.
LikeLike
I’m not sure what you’re saying here either, Paarsurrey. Could you elaborate some more on this, and what you mean by “the truthful religion”? Which religion is this, and how is more truthful than the hundreds of other religions that also claim to be “truthful”?
Let’s first define ‘superstition’ so that we’re all on the same mental page. Merriam-Webster defines it thus: (1a) a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation; (1b) an irrational abject attitude of mind toward the supernatural, nature, or God resulting from superstition; (2) a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary.
I’m not sure how much you know about the history of doubt and atheism, Paarsurrey, but skepticism in the supernatural and superstition has always defined both of these movements. There’s a difference between not knowing what you don’t know, and living in willful ignorance. There may have been atheists once-upon-a-time who believed that the Earth was flat. Until Pythagoras demonstrated that our world is spherical, there was no reason to think otherwise. This is fundamentally different from what those who hold a religious worldview do.
Those who have doubted or disbelieved the existence of supernatural deities have also tended to doubt or disbelieve other baseless claims or traditions. In a hundred years, there may be atheists who look back on the age we live in now as full of superstitions based on the knowledge that they will have discovered. However, atheists and skeptics today act on the knowledge that we have available to us, just as they did in previous centuries, and are continually questioning beliefs and views we hold.
LikeLike
@ David: reference comments of August 13, 2013 at 9:44 pm
Superstition- “a belief or practice resulting from ignorance”
This perfectly fits on the Atheists; there is no requirement of any knowledge to be an Atheist; Atheism is open to any ignorant man whatsoever.
Simply one has to jump into its fold without any solid, valid and positive evidence/s at hand; just exclaiming denial without a reasonable doubt makes one an Atheist.
LikeLike
… the hell? You amaze me, whoever you are.
LikeLike
Thanks
LikeLike
It wasn’t a compliment. Rather, it amazes me how much willful ignorance you’re displaying. Truly remarkable.
LikeLike
@ David: reference comments of August 13, 2013 at 9:44 pm
“Could you elaborate some more on this, and what you mean by “the truthful religion”? Which religion is this, and how is more truthful than the hundreds of other religions that also claim to be “truthful”?”
The truthful religion could be any religion based on the Word Revealed from the one true God. It could have any familiar names like the religion of Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Jesus, Socrates, Muhammad etc; or it could have a generic name like Islam; provided its basic tenets are ascertained from the original text and the context verses in the original language revealed on its frontal personage like Muhammad.
Since the source of all above named great human beings is the one true God; hence there is no difference of teachings of all the aforementioned truthful people.
LikeLike
Pingback: Questioning or doubting other beliefs is no evidence of truthfulness of Atheism | paarsurrey