Another year draws to a close and it's strange how many of the lessons you have to learn are done in a bunch at the end of the year. I was talking to a colleague last week who is an evangelical christian. I was concerned about two things. Firstly, how little knowledge they had about religion in general. The terms Agnostic, Atheist, Deist, Pantheist, Theist where all new terms to them. I thought that the church would be educating their parishners in these terms, if only to argue against them. The person I was discussing this with is an intelligent, witty and extremely nice person. They have a job that requires a high level of technical expertise as far as I understand what they do. But they hadn't thought to ask these questions. After talking for a little while about these terms, and generally about evolution as opposed to the creation philosophy, they stated their belief that the "Man did not decend from apes". To Evangelicals, the bible is the last word on the topic. Man was literally created by God and the Earth is only 6000 years old and probably that it's at the centre of the Universe. I wish I had more time to ask how they feel about science and it's findings. The fossil record. Carbon dating etc. Maybe I will take the conversation further next year.
This led into a conversation last night with a colleague in the pub (Well, it is Christmas :-) ). Who was arguing for the fact that it is acceptable to have that sort of belief. I don't think he really thought that but was playing devils advocate. Isn't quoting a theory, no matter how much evidence is in favour of it, just a belief system too? that was the argument proposed. I think all that calls into question is our use of the word "belief". If your only evidence is a book, written by someone several hundred years after the events it purports to describe, with no actually proveable elements, then you are on a sticky wicket as far as I'm concerned.
My second lesson was about the kindness of strangers. Standing at Holborn tube station last night, A blind guy was trying to find the door of the tube train. I only became aware of this after seeing someone trying to gently guide him towards the open door. A very small act of kindness that quite overwhelmed me. This is not something I see everyday.
Happy Holidays
1 comment:
Science is not a belief system, it's about coming to conclusions based on reasoned logical thought; the opposite of a belief system IMO, which is a way of thinking based on blind faith alone. Science describes the world based on observable empirical and measurable evidence, religion stubbornly ignores that evidence. Science is never the finished article; we are always having to restructure theories, even throw them out in some cases as we learn more. That's the beauty of science - the ability to evolve our ideas of the world as we learn more & more - a very humble approach in which we are willing to accept we are wrong when the evidence suggests it - the complete opposite of blind stubborn faith in the face of no evidence for ideas that religion supports.
I think the important thing is to separate the ideas of a creator, and religion itself. I think many non-religious people are able to consider the possibility that there maybe a creator. But there is a big leap of faith between considering the possibility of a creator, and believing that the religious texts written by men have anything to do with that creator. That's where the faith plays the part, not in believing there is a creator, which is entirely possible, but the ridiculous ideas that religious texts carry the words of a possible creator.
To consider the possibility of a creator is reasoned open minded thought.
To believe that religious texts have been written by and carry the message of a creator is blind faith in the face of heaps of evidence suggesting to the contrary. Those texts are written by someone who only had the knowledge contemporary to the age they were written i.e. all wrong.
Unfortunately, as blind faith in something is the total absence of reasoned thought, it's impossible to have a reasoned discussion with someone who has those views.
Post a Comment