About a week after I posted the essay in Part 1, I received an encouraging comment from a blogger named Ran Selig, whose site is no longer up. But in his comments, he gave me a suggested reading list that included Sam Harris's "The End of Faith." It is still the most impassioned and well-reasoned tome on atheism I've ever read.
Since then, I've gone through several works on atheism including those of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens. I've even read Spencer Wells (also an atheist) -- who wrote a "genetic" history of humankind -- to gain as much knowledge about who I am and where I came from. But these modern scientists, philosophers and writers are only reviving a secular torch that throughout the years has been carried by the likes of Thomas Paine, Robert Green Ingersoll, Bertrand Russell and Madalyn Murray O'Hair.
The title of the post below is called "Once You Start Down This Road...", which I think is still quite fitting, even now, because it has not been an easy one to walk. There have been times when I have found myself preaching this new choice, and for this, I ask forgiveness of those folks who have suffered my brand of "apologetics" these past few years.
11 October 2004
At Ran Selig's suggestion, I've begun reading "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris and I was amazed at how quickly it "comes out fighting." I'm serious, Mr. Harris gets right to the point of his book regarding the dangers of being faithful to the "untestable" notions purported as truth by all of the world's religions. As I have not completed the book, I will refrain from offering my own biased review of Mr. Harris' work, but it's a difficult book to put down.
And, yet, it's an easy book to put down for those who have not the will nor capacity to confront their own beliefs. More often than not, I find myself positioning my hand so that it obscures the title of the book as I read it on the train or in the cafeteria at lunch out of fear of some religious wacko making a comment or, worse yet, making a physical threat. Such are the times that even in as liberal and "secular" a city as New York, one can feel threatened by the mere reading of a book. But "The End of Faith" is no ordinary book and I feel it will take an extraordinary amount of courage on my part to continue reading it.
I admit it. I'm somewhat of a coward. Always have been. I'd more than likely keep my mouth shut than confront a bully -- be it a physical or intellectual one. I'd rather hunker down and let the storm die down than stand up to it. I wish I weren't like that, but I'm like most people of modest means -- you really can't change the size of your cock. I've learned to live with my shortcomings (or is that "short-cummings"?? ha ha) and fight only those battles worth fighting. I fear that Mr. Harris' book will be my new "field of battle."
As the title of my post states, once you start down the road of reason, you cannot return to being blindly faithful. There is no doubt in my mind that I will lose the company of some friends and, even, family members for holding onto this "faithless" position, yet, I'm determined to see this through. I give a great deal of credit to my wife for allowing me to express my point of view to her. On more than one occasion she's asked me "how do you go from being a faithful church-goer one day to being an atheist the next?" My answer to her is that the metamorphosis was not as sudden as it appears -- that my learning and life experience has led me to this point.
I assured her that I would neither interfere with nor discourage the "religious" education of our children because I feel that it's a rite of passage they must endure. As much as I want to raise my children in a house of reason, I have chosen to continue their exposure to religion because it arms them with the information they'll need to eventually discard it. Again, I have nothing but high praise for my wife on this issue because she respects my position on this matter. While she cannot fathom a life without faith, she also knows that at some point our children will eventually make their own decision on this. If nothing else, I've convinced my wife to let our children "reason" this issue out for themselves.
As for me, I'm too far down this road to turn back. It's very bumpy and difficult to manage and I have no doubt that in the coming months and years, it's bound to get even harder. It's not like I can keep this a secret. I must live and make my living in the same world as everyone else and soon enough, I will be called out on my beliefs or, in this case, the lack thereof. All I ask of my wife, my family, and my friends is that my lack of faith does not make me love them any less than I did when I was faithful; that morality and goodness are not commodities exclusive to the God they worship or religion they follow. I simply have chosen a different path, one based on knowledge and reason, and that they should take comfort in knowing that this is what makes me happy.
One More Article / Un Altro Articolo
-
Over the years teaching at La Scuola d’Italia NY, I have learned that
children are not just students; they are careful observers of the world,
full of q...
6 months ago
Greetings Spartacus. This is very interesting indeed. I appreciate the breath and depth of your journey.
ReplyDeletePlease be aware that I am a little concerned about not expressing myself well here. You know I respect your position.
While I can fully understand how the awful, hateful, unspeakable horror of the abuse scandal opened a door, I have to believe that door was already unlocked.
The scandal is one of the darkest moments in the history of the church and reading this I realize I am going to have to write a post of my own on topics related to that.
However, to get back to the point... You know it feels so hard to say any of what I want to say, for fear of being misunderstood or sounding strident. Neither of which is my position.
From your post- Mr. Harris gets right to the point of his book regarding the dangers of being faithful to the "untestable" notions purported as truth by all of the world's religions.
How can I explain faith? It can't be tested like that. It can be questioned and it is an interior journey. That is why it is called faith and not reason. I guess I bring this up first because of a perception I have. I may be wrong, so if I am, clear it up for me please.
Is there something wrong with believing? I get the idea - and I have not read the book, just a lot about Harris' book, that he thinks there is something inherently wrong with it.
Is this so and why?
If I can say live and let live, can Sam Harris say that?
Bear with me when I tell you that this line evokes some anger for me...And, yet, it's an easy book to put down for those who have not the will nor capacity to confront their own beliefs.
What? I know you wrote that as a generalization, but do you think that someone who believes does not have the will or capacity to to confront their own beliefs?
I have and will always continue to question and test. It is not likely I will leave my faith behind, but it is not impossible.
How can I claim it as faith unless I have doubted Unless I have tested? Questioned? For me, as a person of faith, I must have the courage to do just that and not know what will come out the other end.
There is no such thing as blind faith for me. And I can tell you, I am not some unusual creature... there are more of us.
See, this does get at the heart of why some of these conversations get me going. If I don't push my ways onto you, why hassle me about mine? I don't think you are personally doing this, but it feels like that kind of message to me.
This is all sensitive and subjective isn't it? I know that I want to talk about this and discuss and as I reread, I just feel screechy. Am I screechy?
Now I feel angry that the word Christian has been co-opted by right wing nutty Christians, by bad priests, by televangelists and the like. In that context I can see why you all think we are all nuts.
But at some level to me that becomes like saying all Jews are this, all Hispanics are this, all Blacks are that, all Irish are that, and so on.
Not all Christians or Catholics are bad. I don't think you are saying that this is the case, but this whole atheism conversation seems to somehow get to that spot.
I admit- I might just not get it because of my position.
Now let me highlight something that really touched me and that I think is true...
All I ask of my wife, my family, and my friends is that my lack of faith does not make me love them any less than I did when I was faithful; that morality and goodness are not commodities exclusive to the God they worship or religion they follow. I simply have chosen a different path, one based on knowledge and reason, and that they should take comfort in knowing that this is what makes me happy.
I just reread this- I am so all over the place here. I am going to leave this comment, but may come back to add and will absolutely be back to discuss.
I hope Cliff, Kelso, Dcap, Dcup and others join the conversation.
Oh yay, all of you against me!
Seriously, I look forward.
(this is my worst comment ever i think.)
Somebody- say something. I feel like I am out here all alone. But that just may be the way it is.
ReplyDeleteI seek the exchange of ideas. Not converts!!
Okay Fran...I'm saying something. My apologies for not responding to your questions last night. I didn't pick up your new comment until late last evening and was way to exhausted to offer a cogent response. (This late night blogging is killing me...LOL!)
ReplyDeleteAll the same, thank you so much for offering such a heartfelt response to my post here. In the end, I know we may not reach any agreement on this issue of faith, but what I am happy over -- indeed, what I rely on -- is your willingness to discuss this in a rational, humane manner. You are a rarity amongst the faithful that I come in contact with daily.
I also want to let you know up front that I did not confuse your impassioned response as screechiness. If you had written to me that I must repent or suffer the pain of eternal damnation, I would not have even attempted so long a response, but, instead, tried vainly to keep down the beverage I was drinking at the time I read it.
But let's get to your questions, shall we?
How can I explain faith? It can't be tested like that..
If you can't test your notions derived from faith, how is that you believe them. For me, the problem stems from how we define "faith" and "belief." They are two entirely different concepts, which I feel are erroneously synonymous. I often make this error myself. That said, faith is a wholly-religious word that implores you to suspend rational thought and "believe" something to be true in the face of either overwhelming evidence against (Galileo is my shining example) or a conspicuous lack thereof. Belief, on the other hand implies that a rational conclusion being made after observing a repeated, but as yet, unexplainable phenomena. For example, I know little about the sun's chemical machinations, but I believe that if I look to the eastern horizon at approximately 6AM tomorrow, it will appear. It does this everyday. I further that believe my usual morning train will pull into my station at approximately 6:17AM every weekday. There have been anomalies to the latter example, all of which can be explained quite easily (equipment problems, signal problems, weather, union strikes, et al). Can the same be said of God or Mohamed or Vishnu or any other diety? How about Zeus?
Is there something wrong with believing? (re: Sam Harris questions)
There is nothing wrong in believing so long as it is based in rational thought and discourse, and independently testable notions. Harris has no problem with a person's faith, but with those of faith looking to take over the world and supplant it with their vision of the ideal; with those who want to hasten a heaven on earth; with those who want "respect" for their faith, so as to avoid a rational, if not risky, discussion about it. Thankfully, Fran, I don't see you as fitting into any of these categories.
In fact, Sam Harris does live and let live. His objection is those faithful who cannot. Why do we need to add a God reference into our pledge of allegiance if in fact we are a country based on secular ideals; a secularity, I might add, that is written into our constitution?
What? I know you wrote that as a generalization, but do you think that someone who believes does not have the will or capacity to to confront their own beliefs?
Yes, but a clarification is in order here. The first I've already described, which is that there's a difference between belief and faith. The second hones in on the word "confront." Faithful people question their beliefs all the time; Mother Theresa is proof of this, as you are, too. However, questioning one's faith and the belief that stems from them and confronting them are very different notions, the latter of which requiring that before any further belief and faith are offered, one will require convincing and verifiable proof. Perhaps I should have been more precise on this point because this is a very fine distinction to make, particularly in a language such as English where synonyms are much too easy to create. You know, like from back in the day when "bad" was synonymous with "good", "awesome" and "cool".
How can I claim it as faith unless I have doubted Unless I have tested? Questioned? For me, as a person of faith, I must have the courage to do just that and not know what will come out the other end.
But do you know what will come out at the other end? Anyone can posit theories, but the ones that become widely accepted as fact are the ones that are tested and re-tested for verification. And even then, what we may consider fact now may need to be revisited and reconsidered on the basis of newer evidence and knowledge. It's a continuous process. Why does God and religion fall beyond this test? For that matter, why the need for a singular moral and creative authority to explain our existence?
If I don't push my ways onto you, why hassle me about mine? I don't think you are personally doing this, but it feels like that kind of message to me.
I don't see it as hassling you as much as I do see it as me wondering out loud how a seemingly, good, kind, rational, intelligent person, who requires proof in all other walks of life, doesn't need one when it comes to God and religion. If anything, I find it perplexing.
Now I feel angry that the word Christian has been co-opted by right wing nutty Christians, by bad priests, by televangelists and the like. In that context I can see why you all think we are all nuts.
But at some level to me that becomes like saying all Jews are this, all Hispanics are this, all Blacks are that, all Irish are that, and so on.
Agreed. But are you open to possibility that the reasons for being faithful or overly embracing a cultural heritage are inherently flawed?
Fact is, we all stem from the same cell structure. Procreation knows no barriers or limitations. Nor are we born with any knowledge of faith. As a Hispanic, I had children with an Irish woman, but it could have just as easily been a black woman, or a Jew, etc.... Culture, like God, are human creations -- barriers, in fact -- that we simply no longer need.
In fact, I long for a day when we no longer need to be "in" this group or that; to be able to engage another human being - be it in love, discussion, or what have you. I long for the day when people do not bat an eye when someone "different" moves in to the neighborhood or when no fuss is made about a halfway house for the mentally disabled being set up there. I long for the day when we can drop our nationalistic labels and sub-labels. These are divisive elements that are being used against us by those in power to maintain their grip on power and, sadly, I lump religion into that mix. We simply don't need them.
But I digress...hopefully, I've answered your questions without creating any further offense. Fran, I respect your faithfulness in so far as you've allowed me to call it into question. If in the end, we simply choose to agree to disagree, I will hold this discussion here as proof that we have satisfied the requirements of us being friends. We talked and didn't kill each other in the process. I remain....
You are brilliant. I will be back!
ReplyDeletewow
ReplyDeletei feel so shallow
FIA knows my feelings on religion and faith -- and Spart they align with you in many ways...probably for different reasons, but nonetheless we are at the same place.
what is truly great is that we can let people who dont believe or feel the same way in terms of believing into our lives and -- you know what -- it makes us that much richer (escept Bush lovers, they can never make anyone richer or better)
now back to Rosh Hashanah dinner
8-)
the two of you make me wish i had paid attention more in writing and english in high school
Franny-
ReplyDeletePeace be with you sista. Despite our "discussions" on faith, I believe you are one of the coolest Catholics I know.
DCap - Shalom. But don't sweat the high school English thing. I never did, although I was an English major in college.
I was hoping to hear from D-cap. Oh ****(your real name obscured by stars!), you had more patience with me in Poland than I deserved. What a mitzvah! Any other good secular Jew would have cried out "enough already" at the second church. I think we got up to about 5.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, you can write perfectly well and you know that Mr Smartypants D-Cap.
Spartacus- we are cool. We may never agree, but we will discuss and that is what it is all about. The free and open exchange of ideas.
I will be back with more very soon.
And a very special thank you to a very special someone for helping me identify myself in an appropriate way.
Spartacus I am still laughing from before. That was funny.
ReplyDeleteI have tried several times to reply but I keep rambling on and veering off.
What to do?
I will hit some highlights-
Faith vs. belief. You are onto something here but after much thought it doesn't work that way for me. I am in no way tied to us agreeing about this. For me, for what I have it is both faith and belief. The way it has been tested in my life is not scientific and yet it is very, deeply and powerfully real.
Now I could take up 17 paragraphs trying to explain it but in the end you might think..."Liberal. Yes. Funny. Yes. Insightful.Yes. Wingnutty. Yes." Not to make light, but I am not sure that these thoughts are transferable.
I may read about the saints and be inspired, but I am not a believer or faithful simply because of them. I have my own experience. That's how it works for me anyway.
Many people believe out of fear or obligation. Once again, not my issues. I believe and I have faith both because I choose to do so freely. I choose this because it means something to me.
Which brings me to(ok so much for short form) - my spiritual life is not between "me 'n God". It is how I live in the world, how I conduct myself, how I act, how I appropriate all that has been given to me.
IMHO I think it is more important to live generously and with an open heart rather than to attend church and to be dogmatic. Now I do happen to attend church and not only weekly, but sometimes daily. Because I choose to. The notion of God with an attendance form is sure to set me into fits of laughter.
Seriously- I will be judged on how I lived, how I gave what was given to me. That's what is at the root.
So why God and not Shiva or Vishnu or whomever or whatever? For me God works, for me Jesus works. That is how I can process this. If someone else lives a good life with Vishnu, Buddha or focused on a butterfly, that is great. I think God actually designed it that way for a reason.Only humans want to fight about "my God is better than your God!" Even when they are talking about the same God as we see within Christian denominations, within Judaisim and within Islam and then across all 3 Abrahamic religions. What a hoot. We are all fools.
Anyway to move on- none of this is inherently flawed to me. If you see it that way, that's cool with me. This of course refers to my "if all Christians are wing nuts then all Hispanics (pickin on you man) are this" and so forth.
There is no way this can be true to me. I just know too many good, really truly deeply good Christian people who are in direct contrast to many really truly deeply bad Christian people whom I abhor.
The same can be said for any other fill in the blank.
That said and to move on- not all people who practice religion want to use it for division. Like I am in this group and you are not - nyah nyah.
Sure there are plenty who do but then there are plenty of people who use all kinds of things from ethnicity, economics and more to do the same thing.
So while I appreciate your not wanting to be part of a group, I am not exactly clear on how that has bearing. Unless of course you were in some situation that was defined by that.
So we could go on and on and I am sure that in other formats we will.
I believe- I have faith and you don't. We both believe in a lot of other things in common, not the least of which is that the free and open exchange of ideas is essential to life.
Now there's something to believe in, right?
I liked Sam Harris's book a lot. I sure learned a lot, and I BELIEVE (ha ha) that his argument that MODERATE sects are also bad, I had a lot of problems with his position IN DIRECT conflict with his above viewpoint that on should make value judgements with regard to Judaism versus Islam. Either all religion is crap, Sam, or none of it is, right? I dont know that Judaism is BETTER than Islam. I'm a Jew who doesn't practice religion. How could I possibly koow?
ReplyDeleteMoreover, I'm fucking sick and tired of reading these self-congratulatory Jewish emails that wend their way around the telegraph wire showing how many Jewish Nobel Prize winnersr there have been and how few Muslims. It's like 1000-to-1. Does anyone think that in any pfe-Manela/DeKlerk aparteid in South Africa would have had a longer list of potential BLACK candidates for their Medals of Honor in scholaship?
Kelso -
ReplyDeleteI'm with you on this one to a point. Religion is an either or proposition on religion. But as I recall, Harris had quite a bit of venom for Judaism and spent quite a bit of time hammering what Christians call the Old Testament. Whether he spent more time denigrating Islam or he makes Judaism out to be a better religion that Islam, I could not say, and therefore, am I'll prepared to argue to the point here.
I hate to get all Ronnie Reagan on you, but right now, all I have for you on your specific criticism of Sam Harris' book is that "I don't recall."
Slightly OT, but the Mets are killing me dude. They got their asses kicked by the Phillies this weekend -- yesterday's game just made me sick to my stomach. 11 walks allowed and six errors committed. They're in trouble if they keep playing like that these last two weekends. Ouch.