Sunday, January 28, 2007

Atheism as Arrogance: Part II

The only people I fear
are those who never have doubts
Save us all from arrogant men,
and all the causes they're for
I won't be righteous again
I'm not that sure anymore

- “Shades Of Grey”, Billy Joel

Like Billy Joel (an atheist, by the way), people who never doubt their own belief systems concern me. I once stopped seeing a cute, lawyer-type* because he was annoyingly certain that he knew exactly how the world functioned and where he and everyone else fit into that world. It goes without saying that I could never have dated Ayn Rand.

Atheism is often pushed aside as the more obnoxious half-sibling of polite, well-behaved agnosticism. After all, since we are merely human and therefore not all knowing, isn’t it only reasonable to admit we might not know the “truth” of reality? Isn’t it possible there IS a god and we just don’t know it? Aren’t we being awwwwfully arrogant by declaring ourselves atheists instead of agnostics?

Sure, I’ll admit it: I’m not absolutely certain of anything. While I find it improbable, I suppose I could be a brain in a vat somewhere and only think I’m really living in this reality. Or, this reality could exist, but very, very smart aliens (or mice) might be staging my life as some sort of grand experiment. Or, maybe my life is as the “personal god” folks describe, and I live in a universe where god** has at least some degree control over my life and/or thoughts and just finds it a grand joke to not give me some sort of sign that he exists. (shrugs) Any of the above could be the case, I suppose.

However, to me, none of these maybes are relevant to the way I live. Frankly, the only “stuff” I have to evaluate this world is the result of my senses and thought processes, and the conclusions I can draw from such. I have no need to add a god into the equation, and so I don’t, just as I don’t decide I’m a brain in a vat just because it is a possibility. With a bit of imagination, I could conjure up no end of “reasons why I am here”, but which would I chose and where would I stop? It seems easier and far more logical to thoroughly explore what lies in front of me than to invent unnecessary “whys”. I exist. I’ll just go from there.

Sure, we natural-world minded rationalists change our minds about many things many, many times. Newton was right and then he wasn’t. We accept that as we learn more, ideas change. We constantly find new ways of evaluating the world and accept that sometimes our old evaluations were incorrect. This doesn’t shatter the idea of science nor does it make living a life based on our knowledge of the rational world arrogant. Through the processes of repetition and peer review, science constantly sets itself up to be proven wrong again and again and again. That’s okay. We’re satisfied with the movement towards correctness rather than correctness as a position.

All this flux doesn’t justify agnosticism. My atheism isn’t an elaborate construction involving multitudes of facts and assumptions—it’s an acceptance of the evidence gathered from the physical, sensory reality in which I reside. I don’t see evidence for Zeus or Allah or Jehovah or whoever. I didn’t see evidence for any of these gods yesterday or the day before or the day before. I highly doubt that such evidence will present itself tomorrow. I suppose I could be wrong. However, as described above, I could be wrong about a lot of things. I don’t wander around remaining agnostic about whether I might gain the power to levitate tomorrow or whether I’ll discover I’m really a Russian princess (or philosopher). Sure, I could be wrong about a lot, including whether or not there is a god. However, it’s just so darn improbable, it doesn’t seem worth the energy. Within the scope of what I find reasonable and likely, I’m happy to declare myself an atheist.



* I suppose, to be entirely honest, I should also disclose that he was a Republican. I’m ridiculously socially liberal and not so far behind in the economic areas either… but I’d like to at least pretend that I wouldn’t stop dating someone just because he was a Republican.

** Obviously, I could also never date god. How much more arrogant can one get than claims of omnipotence and omniscience?

Random Randomness

Mr. KA over at biblioblography tagged me for this meme quite a while ago. I’ve been playing hooky (again), but I’ve finally forced myself to sit down at the computer and write.

  • I become ridiculously excited by grocery shopping, cooking, and just looking through recipes. I learned to cook largely because I spent eight years as a vegan (I’m still vegetarian) and found it terribly difficult find good vegan food.

  • I once backed into an SUV because it wasn’t a goat. I used to have pet goats who would just run around my house nibbling on my lawn, part of which was an alfalfa field. Before backing out of my garage, I would always glance into my rear-view mirror to be sure there wasn’t a goat in my driveway. One morning, I glanced back, saw no goats, put my car into reverse, and listened to the trunk of my car crumple against the SUV that I had seen but that my brain had entirely ignored because it wasn’t, indeed, a goat. The SUV was fine. So were the goats. My little Honda hybrid spent two weeks in the shop.

  • My favorite local club is a leather bar, complete with a whipping wall. What can I say- the people there just act so much more “normal” than those at more traditional clubs and bars.

  • Rick Finch, one of the founders of K.C. and the Sunshine Band, is sleeping in my bed. Okay, to be more accurate, he is sleeping in a bed that I bought and have not sold or given away, but that is located in a house that I no longer occupy. I do not sleep in the bed with Rick Finch; however, it sounds much more risqué when worded in the first fashion.

  • I’m moving to Boston in June! I once spent a summer in Boston and absolutely loved it. It’ll be lovely to be back. Now, I just have to find a job…


As for tagging new people to complete the meme…. It seems most everyone I know has already been tagged (that’s what I get for waiting so long). So, my excuse is that I took virtual antibiotics and always virtually coughed into my virtual elbow and thus successfully avoided passing along the meme. Anyone who wants to catch the meme is welcome to have a lick of the lollypop that I carefully contaminated while I was sick, just in case.

Saturday, January 20, 2007

Oh Zeus!

ATHENS, Greece - After all these centuries, Zeus may have a few thunderbolts left. A tiny group of worshippers plans a rare ceremony Sunday to honor the ancient Greek gods, at Athens' 1,800-year-old Temple of Olympian Zeus. Greece's Culture Ministry has declared the central Athens site off-limits, but worshippers say they will defy the decision.

"These are our temples and they should be used by followers of our religion," said Doreta Peppa, head of the Athens-based Ellinais, a group campaigning to revive the ancient religion.

(skip a few paragraphs)
Greece's archaic religion is believed to have several hundred official followers, mainly middle-aged and elderly academics, lawyers and other professionals. They typically share a keen interest in ancient history and a dislike for the Greek Orthodox Church.

(skip a few paragraphs)
Peppa's group, dedicated to reviving worship of the 12 ancient gods, was founded last year and won a court battle for official state recognition of the ancient Greek religion.

Those who seek to revive the ancient Greek religion are split into rival organizations which trade insults over the Internet. Peppa's group is at odds with ultra-nationalists who view a revival as a way to protect Greek identity from foreign influences.

They can't even agree on a name for the religion: One camp calls it Ancient-Religion, another Hellenic Religion.


- Zeus worshippers demand access to temple

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Administrative Note

I’ve changed the “official” domain of this blog to www.irreverentmusings.com. The old address, aviaana.blogspot.com, will continue to forward here, but I’d appreciate it if those with links could update them to the new address.

Many thanks!

Leading Evidence the Universe Wasn’t Intelligently Designed

1. Pi isn’t three. If the universe were intelligently designed, not only would certain bible verses imply that pi is three, but it actually WOULD be three, rather than a student-baffling irrational number.

2. Atheists exist. As one of those with less “god gene” than others, I often marvel at the fact that if there were an intelligent designer, he did a darn poor job of designing me (and many others) as good little believers. Want people to acknowledge your divine presence? Design them in a way that encourages such! If I had a marquee on my index finger that constantly explained to me the wonders of the divine world, I’d be far more convinced.

3. London, England is realllllly far away from Columbus, Ohio. Pfff. Why would this be? A god with sense would realize that those from the Midwest clearly need regular excursions to London, and thus would have placed them in closer proximately. Same with Antarctica and the Caribbean. Clearly, these are compliments to one another and should be within walking distance so when one gets sick of one climate, one can visit the other.

4. Women don’t come with a mute button. (blinks) Wait. Not only did I definitely NOT come up with that last one, but the creator of that last sentence will certainly be sleeping on the couch for at least a month. Let me replace it with: if there were an intelligent designer, men with a predilection towards making comments such as the one above would have mechanical devices in their heads that would allow their significant others to shock them when they said such. (nods) Much better.

5. Men have no vibrating genitals. None. How ridiculous and poorly designed is that? Clearly, if we were designed, the designer either wasn’t omnipotent or wasn’t benevolent. Either way--- a ridiculous oversight!

Okay, so, title not withstanding, these might not be the leading reasons why the universe couldn’t possibly be intelligently designed. Want to explore some other reasons? Check out Wikipedia’s Argument from poor design. It’s very remotely possible that their reasons are a bit more scientific than mine. Remotely.

Saturday, January 06, 2007

Atheism as Arrogance: Part I

First, a few notes:

  • Monotheists don’t call the belief that they have correctly identified the one true god out of the thousands possible arrogance. They call it faith.


  • Even those who like to point out, “well, you can’t prove there isn’t a god,” tend to not call those who have a lack of a belief in, say, unicorns arrogant. They call it realistic.



Atheism, however, seems to be oh-so-often equated with arrogance. With the release of a new book from each, Dawkins and Harris have been getting a lot of press as the new, in-your-face variety of “atheist evangelicals.” I’ve been recently making my way through Dawkins’ newest book. With the title The God Delusion, it’s clearly not intended for a theistic audience. However, I could imagine a wavering agnostic, or even a certain sort of “spiritual but not religious” appreciating and benefiting from reading it. Is it arrogant, though?

ar•ro•gance
Offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.

- Dictionary.com


The key word in the definition above is “offensive.” None of us have 20-20 vision when it comes to perceiving the world around us; we all wear glasses of some variety, tinted by a mesh of factors drawn from our genetics and experiences. The statements and positions I might characterize as offensive are entirely different from those another person might categorize as such.

Even with my atheist-tinted lenses, I suppose I still see phrases such as “an act of intellectual high treason” (Dawkins pg 19) as possible hyperbole, even if not precisely arrogant. Even when prefaced by “in my opinion” (as the above statement is in his book), phrases like this need to be read with a strong British accent to avoid sounding overdramatic.

According to Dawkins, “God, in the sense defined, is a delusion.” Dawkins also writes that he won’t go out of his “way to offend, but nor shall I don kid gloves to handle religion any more gently than I would handle anything else.” (pg 27) I find this fair and think he is correct in insisting that religion not be treated as an unchallengeable subject (as it often is). However, when you compare god to garden fairies (as he does), you do run the risk of offending those who don’t believe their religion is the same as children’s fantasy.

Dawkins, to some, might be considered offensive. What about atheism itself—is the entire concept offensive? Well, that seems to depend entirely on the potential offend-ee. Atheism might offend people by indicating that they are, in fact, not correct. However, most religions (and all monotheistic ones) by default do the same. Atheism certainly isn’t the only spoil-sport of religious belief--- clashing religions manage to “offend” each other in this way quite well on their own.

So, what about the rest of the definition? Is atheism a position of superiority? Believing you hold a correct answer to a question is not in itself posturing superiority. If this is all it takes to be classified as arrogant, all true believers of whatever faith are certainly at least as arrogant as atheists. We claim that there is no proof. They claim that faith should be enough. (shrugs)

How about self-importance? Well, it seems to me that believing you are personally blessed by a doting god might reek of self-importance a bit more than the quiet satisfaction of knowing you are working yourself to shape a better existence for yourself and others.

Finally, does atheism involve undue pride? (shrugs) Though I was the one who asked it, the question itself baffles me. Pride in what in particular? It’s a lack of a belief. Pride in that?

Though it might be fashionable to say otherwise, I don’t know many people who really think all atheists are superior, self-important beings with a sense of overbearing pride. Most acknowledge that some are, while some aren’t... just like theistic folks. However, it’s still so terribly trendy (especially in the news) at the moment to latch onto particular atheists, declare them arrogant, and often extend the label to entire group in one dramatic sweep. Oh well. At least this gives me a good excuse to cut in front of my inferiors in grocery lines without guilt and prattle on about my many talents without shame. After all, I’m an atheist--- I must be arrogant.

Thoughts the “tenability” of atheism versus agnosticism to follow soon…

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

"Above all, this is a question of conscience. Using the initiative process to give a minority fewer freedoms than the majority, and to inject the state into fundamentally private affairs, is a dangerous precedent, and an unworthy one for this Commonwealth. Never in the long history of our model Constitution have we used the initiative petition to restrict freedom. We ought not start now."

"We have work to do over the next year to turn this around. I am heartened by the fact that the overwhelming majority of the members of the Legislature - a margin of over 2 to 1 - voted to move on. I pledge to do what I can to build on that momentum, so that our Constitution will continue to stand for liberty and freedom, and not discrimination."

- Deval Patrick, Massachusetts Governor-elect on the Massachusetts Legislature's decision to vote on a measure to advance a gay marriage ban to the ballot. Patrick is pro same-sex marriage.

Monday, January 01, 2007

Separation of Church and State, No Excuses!

(While this post is technically by dday76, I couldn’t quite keep my fingers out of it. Aviaa-ian inserts are marked with italics. BTW- this post is almost entirely facetious.)

I was in Rome the other day and thought I would pop over to the Vatican to make sure there was no mischief. I walked into the courtyard, saw the people, a big fountain, and some enormous, really expensive looking buildings they built after solving world hunger... and, oh, what's this? A nativity scene? This is government-owned land! How dare they! This huge display flies in the face of Church-State Separation. Angrily shaking my fist, I vowed to follow up with a stern letter to the local magistrate.

Yes, I’m sure the Pope will be very interested in hearing such concerns. Heaven forbid the Vatican promote religion or religious displays! Perhaps he just wasn’t aware such clear conflict of interest was occurring on the property?

By the way, if you haven’t followed the link to look at the picture, you absolutely should. Facetious or not, we were really there…


On the other hand, if these were pious people, maybe I could also benefit from their blessings. I went over to the fountain, tossed a coin in, and wished really, really hard for world peace and just a few small things for myself, Amen.

Clearly, your time at the Vatican was better spent than mine. I just wandered around pondering the items one would include on a Rome/Vatican purity test:

__ had sex on an ancient monument? (3 pts)
__ had sex in a cathedral? (5 pts) with a nun/priest? (10 pts) with the Pope? (50 pts)

… and so forth.


When talking with a local resident later, I found this wasn't the correct way to do one's wishing, or as they call it "praying" at the Vatican. They said something about kneeling and clasping one's hands together, so I noted that for the next time. I'm not sure how well it works though. I came across a young girl literally in the shadow of the Vatican, on her knees, hands clasped, head bowed, just praying her little heart out. But her plastic cup barely had one Euro in it. Almost an hour later, she was still on the same sidewalk and her god's grace hadn't made much headway in filling the plastic cup. Hmm... she perhaps should have been wearing only one sandal or offering up a gourd or such.

God works in myssstttteeerious ways. It makes perfect sense that all present-day miracles are indistinguishable from chance and coincidence, while reports of past miracles of floods, plagues, and the like were so much more… well… miraculous! Helping beggars at the Vatican? Clearly too obvious a miracle for the new, “subtle” version of god.

Happy New Year!

I hope everyone had a fun-filled evening of amusement and mild debauchery yesterday... or, like me, thrilled themselves even more by lying in bed with the flu, sipping Gatorade. Either way, Happy New Year. I’m back from flitting around Europe and shall be posting more regularly once again, barring the effects of natural disaster and distracting hobbies.

As of today, my significant other/concubine/domestic partner type will be occasionally posting and co-blogging as dday76. I promise his posts will be witty, clever, and generally amusing. Or, if for some reason they aren’t such, I promise to withhold sex as punishment. What can I say- quality control is my passion.

Anyway, promised new posts shall be appearing over the next few days!