Rockstar!!
This is Sam Harris, and he's my new favorite rockstar. One of Richard Dawkins' contemporaries, he more clearly articulates the philosophical issues I have with "believers" who take seriously the belief in a Christian or Muslim (or whatever) god. What I particularly enjoy is how he explains that spirituality is not mutually exclusive from atheism. Atheism has been given a horrible rap in popular society and the media. Though I consider myself an atheist, I can immediately feel the consequences of using that word to describe myself. Namely, consequences that place me in a sect of society that even more tolerant believers find abominable. Whatever you are, you certainly don't want to be an atheist. I can think of many family members and friends who are so far from with me on this point that it's not even worth bringing up to them.How do you explain to someone that a more amorphous spirituality doesn't lead one to be corrupt and holds just as much moral responsibility as any dogmatic religion? I know I've said it before, but because we've been raised in a society that largely suffers from the delusion that morals/ethics came from religion doesn't mean we should continue to pay into that delusion. I would encourage all who read my blog to take some time and read this conversation between Sam Harris and Rick Warren. Sam Harris is extremely patient, eloquent and intelligent. He is, in effect, the ultimate antithesis to everything popular society portrays atheists to be. He articulates everything I want to say to my believer friends without coming across as arrogant or demeaning.
posted by Infused Confusion at
2:34 PM
2 Comments:
Why the need to say anything to your believer friends? Remember how you feel when staunchly religious people go after you for your homosexuality?
The only way you can come across as demeaning or arrogant is if you approach a believer as someone who needs to be "saved", just as the opposite would be true.
By
cmo, At
3:04 PM
Sure I remember. Their instance that homosexuality was a sin led me first on the road to realize how incredibly bigoted religion can be. And moreover, how that bigotry can be excused and even (in some cases) lauded. The fact of the matter is, however, that my accusers never once tried to understand my point of view. Never once did a believer who accused me of sin or attempted to convince me I was living some amoral existence tried to get in my shoes.
To my credit, I lived in the shoes of religion so long that while my view is far from biased, it is at least informed.
And I disagree. The fact that all I would do is press my friends to explain the terms they so effortlessly use ("faith", "morals", etc.) doesn't mean I'm trying to save them. What would I be saving them from anyway? I don't feel such a dichotomy as though I'm standing on one side, the smart one, regarding my poor stupid friends on the other side.
The problem is, religion has become so good at shielding itself from critique that any attempt to ask for an explanation means you're being callous or, as you said, trying to "save" someone from their ignorance. It's not a matter of saving, it's a matter of intellectual discourse. Call me crazy, but I want my friends to understand my viewpoint.
By
Infused Confusion, At
3:24 PM
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home