Adam's Fable

A Question of When, Not Why

2012-01-10T09:48:00.000-08:00

Atheism is a curious notion. When contrasted with a belief in something that is essentially supernatural, it leaves one without answers to the question of what is the purpose. Surely, atheism addresses the question of what was the cause and what is likely to be the outcome of events, but it does nothing to suggest that there is a purposeful reason for these things to have happened and continue to happen.

So, what is the purpose of my life the atheist might ask himself. What goals are there that I should pursue or what things should I strive to accomplish? An atheistic stance should respond that there is nothing that one ought to pursue or achieve in one's life. There is no should or ought to. Whatever happens, happens because of the influence of preceding events. The progression of one's life is in no way dependent upon some ulterior purpose. I proceed and progress as forces and events have their impact upon me.

Whatever Will Be...

Wow, that is a curious notion. There are no shoulds or ought tos. There is no meaning to the course my life takes apart from the fact that it will most probably take a course predicated on the multitude of events, near and far, which impact upon it.

I am in large measure who I am, because of the time and place of my birth. As I grew up, I did most of the things I do for the cards dealt me by my biological make up and my external environment. The question of purpose, in fact, may be irrelevant not only for the non-existence of any supernatural entity which might exert some force on the actions that men undertake, but it has no relevance also for the reason that in all likelihood, the course that one's life takes is in large part, if not entirely, the product of what is referred to as determinism.

Alas, the question of purpose in one's life is utterly meaningless. There is life, yes, but its existence has nothing to do with any underlying objective or target toward which it might aim. The question of why am I here as it relates to what I should do with my life, is essentially a meaningless and illogical postulation.

Yes, I am here--I exist. Yes, in the progression of my life I will follow some path and act in any number of impactful ways. And that is all. What is it that I shall then, decide to do with my life? Well, even this question is of dubious merit if one considers the likelihood of a sort of determinism in the progression of the universe.

The answer to this question may well and logically be that I shall do what I shall do. If I were an adolescent, for example, I might think in such regard that I shall go on to enroll in university in the near future--if that is the thing that I shall do. Note, it is not the thing that I should do, but rather the thing that I shall do. That is, I will do it if all the preceding and concurrent events of impact in my life lead me to do so.

If, for example, I had achieved a certain level of academic success in school, if I had or had access to sufficient funds, if there were a higher education ethic in my family or within the circles in which I interacted, then I might certainly go on to enroll in university. It is hardly a question of my determining by some power of the will, aloof as it were from its material and environmental milieu, that I shall go on to university. It is not likely a thing that anyone decides at all, but rather something which is quite simply predicated upon countless events which have occurred and presently occur in proximity to it.

I am an atheist, therefore my understanding is that my life is not subject to the whim or will of any supernaturally divining entity or force. There is nothing or no one that can tell me that I should or ought to follow this path or another. Quite the contrary, the question of pursuing by choice any particular course of action may in fact be illusory. Whereupon, whatever action I in time undertake, may well be the incontrovertible result of the multitude of events which have preceded it.

Yes, fair brethren, I am not only atheistic in orientation, but determinist as well. The question, therefore is not what will I do with my life but more simply put when will it all be done with?

To Be or Not to Be is a Question... of Determinism

...but see that I have stated, pursuing by choice any particular course of action may in fact be illusory, and I emphasize, MAY IN FACT BE, for I am merely postulating on what I observe in the world and how I interpret it. The notion of determinism suggests that there is only one course of action--that which is determined, not by any supernatural force, but as the product of cause and effect.

If, for example, one object strikes another, then the object with the greater accumulated amount of mass and force would propel the other object in an opposite direction. It is not as if the object of lesser accumulated mass and force could decide not to be propelled.

Even if that lesser object somehow possessed the sophistication of some sort of advanced computer circuitry, it could not reason with its logic board that it might respond differently to the impact of the object of greater accumulated mass and force unless there had been prior some sort of programming (and mechanical capacity) given it to counteract the other object. Here, again its course of action will have been determined by something prior and not something whimsically decided upon, however sophisticated its circuitry might be.

Again, I offer this notion as my own postulation based on what I have observed. In the realm of physics, scientists, I have heard, have observed that at some infinitesimal level random events occur, such that their outcomes may neither be predictable nor determined. If such is in deed the case, even if it were only to occur at some remotely miniature level, it may or may not be sufficient to cast doubt on the notion of absolute determinism. Therefore, the most honest way that I can put forward my own postulation is to say that what most of humanity believes to be the phenomenon of choice MAY IN FACT BE only the illusion of choice.

Choice is illusory, in fact, and whatever occurs is simply determined by prior events, including those things which we errantly refer to as decisions.

Good Muslim, Good Christian

2011-08-31T12:29:00.000-07:00

What to make of the pious individual? There is a sweetness in their devotion and the air of humility by which they carry themselves. Underneath it all is probably a desire to be good and do good. There is probably a sincere intention to be an honorable, law-abiding citizen of the planet. And what's wrong with this?

Perhaps it isn't enough to be good or have good intentions. Perhaps it is more important and useful for the sake of humanity to be smart and not simply well-intended. After all, when a job has to be done, for example, it is more useful to know what to do than to simply be well-intended but ignorant.

So, you probably pick up my drift here. The good Muslim, good Christian may be well-intended but may also be... (I am not at liberty to complete this sentence.)

This thing we call religion is such a troubling affair. Do people even understand what it is they purport to believe in, or do they just blindly follow? As a Christian, formerly, I was well-intended, but I wouldn't say that I believed blindly. I knew something about what I purported to believe and I did ask questions. Still, I had a propensity to go along with what I was in a habit of doing and believing.

I WAS one of those good Christians. But I did make some effort to understand what it was I was supposed to be believing in. I think I was more introspective than most believers, which is why I eventually came to the place that I am now. I cannot reconcile a life of devotion to something which does not stand up to scrutiny.

Eid Mubarak, Merry Christmas, Hei Rama... shall we not just be sweet and polite and smile when we and others utter such greetings? I don't know--does this not make us complicit, especially when we know better? The USA is a "Christian country" but I must say I had absolutely no fear in questioning Christianity. The UAE is a "Muslim country". I am indeed fearful of questioning that, under the pain of expulsion from the country or arrest and imprisonment!

Magic

2011-08-19T03:01:00.000-07:00

I am not sure of the term that would best describe my thinking on reality, but I could perhaps use the word naturalist in contrast to a notion of the supernatural.

I believe that all that exists is that which is real, identifiable in some sense and constrained by natural laws. That is to say, things either exist or they don't and the reality of their existence is necessarily connected with a real, physical presence of some kind.

Now, I realize as I write that I am throwing words and notions around, like real and physical, which themselves may require further definition. My reasoning, I fear, may be ultimately circular as if to say all that is real is that which is real.

But if I refer once again to the concept of the supernatural, as that which exists outside of what is perceived as real and natural, this may better define my perception of the real or reality.

Cause & Effect

So, in my realist or naturalist view of the universe, nothing happens without a cause or precedent which causes it to happen. Whatever thought comes into my mind, for example, is generated by something which has preceded it. It does not emerge magically or spontaneously within my consciousness. No doubt those precedents or preceding events and activities are numerous, and it is doubtful, perhaps even impossible, that anything that occurs is in response to a singular precedent.

For me, this notion of cause and precedent is essential in explaining the existence of everything. I would suggest further that these precedents are directly connected to the things which follow them. That is, there must not be a gap or a leap that would disconnect the precedent from the event which occurs afterwards.

Don't Even Think It

The notion of superstition often violates this notion of connectedness in extreme ways. Most people probably believe rather superstitiously that bad thoughts and even bad words spoken can in fact cause the worrying thought or event to happen. How would one feel about, say, repeating a mantra like wishing for death or some other tragedy to befall a cherished loved one...

May my mother die in a tragic car crash, may she die in a tragic car crash... Brrh... the thought of repeating such a mantra almost sends chills through me.

But why... why should it? These words or thoughts can in no way unleash any force which might cause such a thing to happen. There is absolutely no connectedness between the words and the event they refer to--that is, if one believes in a universe that is governed by and conssits only of what is real and natural.

If, on the other hand, one believes in the existence of supernatural forces, then such a mantra may rationally seem to have some power. There may be no physical connection whatsoever between my words or thoughts and the far removed events they refer to, however, the existence of a supernatural plane would allow for such a connection to exist.

Am I saying that there is no rationale to the notion of positive thinking? No, I do not reject the notion of positive thinking, however, that which positive thinking affects is only that to which it is directly connected.

My manner of thinking will certainly effect my own behavior and by extension it will effect the way others respond to my behavior. But there will never be any magical leap that connects my wish for my mother to suffer a tragic death and some force that would cause that event to occur. There is no connectedness... There is no magical power in the words or in the thoughts, yet many people believe in the power of curses and chants.

The Fallacy of the Omni-

Alas, this highlights the serious error and problematic nature of believing in the supernatural. The acceptance of such a notion makes it impossible to rationally argue against any possibility. If things may exist and events may occur without any connectedness to other things or events which precede them, then simply anything may exist or occur, literally out of thin air.

Thinking bad thoughts could lead to their happening, wishing hard enough for good things to happen could result in their happening as well. There is no need to demonstrate or even rationalize how the thought might actually lead to the event when all it takes is a supernatural leap to make that connection.

Now, interestingly, people who believe in the supernatural do not believe simply that just anything can occur. Rather they seem to subscribe to some notion of connectivity of things and events by indicating that it is a supernatural being, e.g. God, Allah, Rama or any other known god, who intervenes to cause the otherwise impossible or unlikely things to happen.

This god is clearly supernatural, and often omnipotent and omniscient, in that his existence and properties need no explanation or justification. Yet, it is somehow necessary to affirm a recognition of this supernatural existence in order to then influence the nature of its intervention in our lives and in the world and universe we inhabit.

Maybe this is all well and good. You believe that there is a god to whom you can offer supplication, from whom you may receive benefits. It may certainly add a sense of personal comfort. I.e. there is no thing, no obstacle, no problem that my God cannot overcome. There are ultimately no unknowns as every answer to every question ultimately rests with this god.

But I reject this notion. There is no rational basis to argue that such a perfect, supernatural phenomenon exists which is simply able to close all gaps. I do not subscribe to the notion that just because the existence of a God might be a good and comforting notion that, therefore, it does exist or that we are better off believing that it does. The problem with the notion of God is that it is ultimately a notion that says anything and everything is possible without any need to demonstrate how. It is simply a belief in magic.

I never believed in things that I couldn't see
I said if I can't feel it then how can it be
No. No magic could happen to me...

And then I saw you
I couldn't believe it, you took my heart
I couldn't retrieve it, said to myself
What's it all about?

Now I know there can be no doubt
You can do magic
You can have anything that you desire...

You Can Do Magic, America (1982).

Magic

Yes, a belief in the supernatural is a belief in magic. But even magic has its rules. Even magic relies on cause and effect, does it not?

The problem with this, however, is that unlike in reality, the cause and effect behind magic is itself imagined , and it is the creation of those who would sometimes like to use their understanding of such things to control and influence others, often to their own benefit and at the expense of their followers.

The magic, which is religion, wraps itself in a powerful cloak of cause and effect. If you give your money, say 10% of it--TO ME-- then some good will come to others and yourself. The cause is you handing over your money and the effect is food to a starving child and eternal salvation for your soul.

Wow, such wondrous power!

Eat pork and it will cause every manner of harmful thing to happen to your body and soul. Fail to pray 5 times in the day and watch out! Fast, don't eat meat on Friday, eat vegetarian on Monday and Saturday, cover up your hair, light a candle, sprinkle water, knock on wood, avoid the path of a black cat... MAGIC!

How strong the connection between causes and their effects are when one believes in MAGIC, and how ironic. One is more enslaved to the notion of cause and effect when one believes in magic, while magic essentially means that things may exist and occur without any cause.

When one on the other hand believes that nothing happens without a cause or basis in real, identifiable phenomena, then one is freed of all the make believe rules and restrictions of religion and superstition. No, my imaginary soul won't be banished to an imaginary hell just because I prayed only four times a day rather than five!

Real and Identifiable Phenomena

One, however, needs to understand the word identifiable in order to understand and appreciate the scope and limitations of believing only in what is real or natural. Identifiable does not mean that a thing can be seen. I am not saying that I only believe what I can see.

Identifiable means that there is the ability to identify and measure a thing, because indeed that thing exists, whether or not we have on hand the tools that would enable us to see or measure the thing.

That is, many things exist which cannot, in fact, be seen. They cannot, for example, be seen with the naked eye. They may not even be viewable or measurable with any of the instruments that we humans currently have in existence. But the fact that they do in fact exist means that in time we may well have the instruments to observe and measure them and verify their existence.

Compare this to that which is merely a figment of the imagination. No invention or technological advancement will ever offer the ability to observe the presumed phenomenon.

Microorganisms may be too small to see with the naked eye, and for much of human existence these things could not be seen. But they nonetheless existed. They caused things to happen. They caused diseases to spread whether man had the technology to observe them or not. They were and are real.

At present, there are physical properties and forces which govern the universe and determine the interactions of matter both seen and unseen--physical properties and forces for which we do not yet have the technical prowess to observe or measure. At best we can only speculate at their existence and make inferences based on what we can observe and measure. This is not belief in the imaginary but rather a rational estimation of reality.

Belief in God, I would suggest, is a belief in something without regard for any need to observe or measure it, or even make inferences based on what is observable. Human beings are asked by religious leaders and prophets--self-claimed or otherwise purported--to believe, and believe absolutely, in something on the basis of unsubstantiated claims.

Comfort in Mystery

I am immensely comfortable with the notion of not knowing. We don't know what is beyond the universe. We do not know what preceded the universe or what caused its generation.

We have no evidence of human existence beyond the biological functioning of the physical being. That is OK. A couple of hundred years ago we did not know of the existence of bacteria or about the causes of most diseases. Should we have remained content with the notion that a cure might come by praying to an imaginary God, or are we not better off having accepted that we did not know what caused or cured disease while making attempts to find out?

What we know at present is that the consciousness of a human beings ends when the physical body ceases to function. If we choose then to fantasize that the essence or soul of the individual continues to exist in some magical place and form, then we do not need to find a way to extend the functioning of the physical body, nor to understand what it is that causes it to function and then cease functioning.

The fact that we don't have the answers, and don't seek to plug up any doubts with simple, imaginary notions means we continue to grow in the challenge of understanding what is real.

I don't need a god, or a heaven or someone to pray to or cry out to when life deals its hardships. I don't know why we need to tell children that there is a Santa Claus or a kind-hearted Jesus to hold grandma in his arms when she dies. What is wrong with the truth? What is wrong with not knowing? There is a great amount of freedom and liberation in understanding that all that is and happens is only what exists in the universe and only that which logically can happen.

Adam's Fable

2009-06-20T09:57:00.000-07:00

As far as I know there are three major religions which describe the story of Adam as the first man--Judaism, Christianity and Islam. I would expect there are more. I wonder how many of the adherents really believe that there was a first man named Adam.

Some, I'm sure, believe it because it is written--in the good book, that is. Is this not something like the the present day quip, if it's on the Internet it must be true?

My take is that I could not care less where it is written or who said it. It is too simplistic a story to be believable. On the other hand, it is the perfect fable. It is simply told and it teaches a moral. There are clear lines of right and wrong, good and evil.

Even more unfortunate than believing simply because it is written in the good book, is believing simply because one was born into a certain faith community and not having the sense--read introspection--to realize that that is, in fact, the primary reason for believing what one does.

One probably cannot prove that the story of Adam is a fable without delving into archeology, scientific dating and other very technical areas. From my point of view, suffice it to say as I have already, that the story is too sweet and simple and clearly serves a function other than providing a historical record.

We can short circuit all the science and just go with a bit of good sense to conclude that Adam is fable.

Why this Blog?

It does not really take a running blog to argue the point that Adam is a fable. The raison d'être of this blog is to engage in a dialog with others over the questions of what one believes and why--with regard to the religious.

I prefer an interfaith discussion. While I can say I know a lot about Christianity, I am also anecdotally familiar with Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism. That said I would say that I am staunchly anti-theist. I believe that god/God is an entirely human construct.

Like any human construct it has its positives and negatives. It is for its very human nature that I find religion a topic of interest and thus this blog. I look forward to dialog with others on the topics to be posted.

So, what about Adam's Fable?

Do you believe it or not? Is it the Christian, Jewish or Islamic version that you prefer. Better still, I would love to hear of other versions.