Fugitives from Fundamentalism

The Musings of Adult Missionary Kids (MKs) & Former Born-Again Believers

Archive for the ‘thoughts’ Category

Thank you Jesus?

Posted by Ann on October 8, 2011

 

 

Advertisements

Posted in Humor, thoughts | 3 Comments »

Compassion easier without belief

Posted by Ann on August 27, 2011

“If we did a good act merely from the love of God and a belief that it is pleasing to Him, whence arises the morality of the Atheist?…Their virtue, then, must have had some other foundation than the love of God.”–Thomas Jefferson

One of my peeves is believers who argue their beliefs by asking nonsense questions that really don’t make sense, and for which there is no answer to convince them from their firmly entrenched beliefs. It’s like some kind of game they like to play I think. I don’t like this game. Ask me a real question but not these play questions. They irritate me, because then I feel sucked into the game by answering, or rude for not, and I know when I do answer they will simply write me off in their heads even though I know my answer is better than anything they think is true in their heads…For instance the questioning of my morality, “If you don’t believe in God, then where do you think morality comes from?” My first thought when hearing this questions is “This has got to be one of the stupidest questions.” At least for me, it really is dumb. Of course I don’t tell the person they are being a dumb ass, but I sure am thinking this is gonna be another one of those dumb interactions where they listen politely to my answer and then politely write me off. And yes, I have already written them off, that is why I don’t ask them why morality has to come from God. That would be a dumb ass thing to do, lol! The answer: Of course there is no cosmic code we live by, morality is in the mind, the same place as our reason. There is no police officer in the sky…

Anyway, I picked up Godless again today and opened it by chance to chapter twelve, “For Goodness Sake”. Once again Barker is inside my mind. I wish I was as articulate in expressing my thoughts as him, but then why not let his writing help me express myself? Some do it a hell of a lot better than others, so here’s a selection from the chapter that gets me down to a T. So theists, next time you ask me the dumb ass question about my morality, read this and then let’s move on to more jovial interactions like hanging out, knowing we have serious differences of thoughts.

“How does an atheist account for the existence of objective moral values?” is a question I often hear. “If you don’t believe in God, then what is your basis for morality?” To me the question is obvious: we atheists find our basis for morality in nature. Where else would we look?

Most atheists think moral values are real, but that does not mean they are “objective.” They can’t be. A value is not a “thing”—it is a function of the mind (which is itself a function). To be objective is to exist independently of a mind. So, an “objective value” is an oxymoron; the existence in the mind of something that is independent of the mind.

Most atheists think that values, though not objective things in themselves, can be objectively justified by reference to the real world. Our actions have consequences, and those consequences can be objectively measured.

Although most atheists accept the importance of morality, this is not conceding that morality exists in the universe—that it is a cosmic object waiting to be discovered. The word “morality” is just a label for a concept, and concepts exist only in minds. If no minds existed no morality would exist.

There is no big mystery to morality. Morality is simply acting with the intention to minimize harm. Since harm is natural its avoidance is a material exercise. Organisms suffer as they bump into their environment and each other, and as rational animals with some ability to anticipate the future, we humans have some choice about how this happens. If we try to minimize harm and enhance the quality of life, we are moral. If we don’t, we are immoral or amoral, depending on our intentions. Even if we make a mistake, we can still be called moral or ethical if it is truly our intention to minimize harm. And the way to avoid making a mistake is to try to be as informed as possible about the likely consequences of the actions being considered. To be moral atheists have access to the simple tools of reason and kindness. There is no cosmic code book directing our actions.

Of course, relative to humanity, certain general actions can be deemed almost uniformly right or wrong. Without the Ten Commandments would it never have dawned on the human race that there is a problem with killing? Prohibitions against homicide and theft existed millennia before the Israelite story of Moses coming down from Sinai.

The way to be moral is to first learn what causes harm and how to avoid it. This means investigating nature—especially human nature, who we are, what we need, where we live, how we function, and why we behave the way we do.

Why should I treat my neighbor nicely? Because we are all connected. We are part of the same species, genetically linked. Since I value myself and my species, and the other species to which we are related, I recognize that when someone is hurting, my natural family is suffering. By nature, those of us who are mentally healthy recoil from pain and wish to see it ended.

Of course, we often act in positive ways to stop the pain of others. This is compassion. Although I don’t think there is a “moral imperative” nor a “compassion imperative:–you can be considered moral if you are passively not causing unnecessary harm—I do think most human beings who are mentally healthy will empathize with the sufferings of others and will naturally want to reach out. Atheists can perhaps express compassion more easily than believers because we are not confused by:

  • Fatalism: “Whatever happens is God’s will.”
  • Pessimism: “We deserve to suffer.”
  • Salvation: “Death is not the end.”
  • Retribution: “Justice will prevail in the afterlife.”
  • Magic: “Pray for help.”
  • Holy war: “Kill for God.”
  • Forgiveness: “I won’t be held responsible for my mistakes.”
  • Glory: “Suffering with Christ is an honor.”

Since this is the only life we atheists have, each decision is crucial and we are accountable for our actions right now.

Yet notice how leading theists deal with the real world: “Ye have the poor with you always,” said the “loving” Jesus, who never lifted a finger to eradicate poverty, wasting precious ointment on his own luxury rather than selling it to feed the hungry (Matthew 26:6-11). “I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ,” Mother Teresa added. “I think the world is much helped by the suffering of poor people.” So much for theistic compassion!

Jefferson may have been wrong to call compassion an “instinct” because many appear not to have it—it seems optional. Or perhaps he was right and the “compassion gene” (to oversimplify) varies across the population like any other human feature (height, intelligence, musical ability, etc.), and some of us have more of the instinct than others have. But it is fortunate that there are enough of us who love life to protect ourselves from those who don’t. We have systems of law, enforcement, justice and defense. We encourage kind, ethical actions through moral education and critical thinking. And though there is no cosmic moral imperative, all of us who value life and consider ourselves moral—atheists and believers alike—can choose to actively exhort others to join us in expressing our innate feelings of altruism and compassion.

Compassion is, after all, a characteristic of being human. When someone commits a horrible act, what do we say? “That was an inhuman thing to do!” We assume that the natural “human” attitude is nonviolent and peaceful. We are not corrupt, evil creatures. A few of us are off to the side of “saintliness” (to borrow a word), and a few of us are off to the other side, the side of mental disease, with sociopaths and criminals. On the bell curve of morality and compassion, however, most of us fall somewhere in the large middle area.

Many believers, including Christians who are ordered to “bring into captivity every thought unto the obedience of Christ,” have an underlying distrust of human reasoning. Yearning for absolutes, they perceive relativism—the recognition that actions must be judged in context—as something dangerous when it is the only way we can be truly moral.

Theists are afraid people will think for themselves; atheists are afraid they won’t.

It is interesting the irrationality of compassionate, kind people who yearn for world peace, who understand the value in humanity, yet internally still believe God is necessary for morality to prevail in the world…

Posted in Liberal Christians, thoughts | 4 Comments »

Leaving the MK fold

Posted by Ann on May 14, 2011

There were many times as a child in a boarding school for missionaries’ kids when it felt a moment lasted an eternity…a very dark eternity alone. Other times I remember laying in the complete darkness of my boarding school room, feeling alone. As a child time seemed fluid. A few days felt like months. And I didn’t sense God, although my mind would reach for one. I only felt the darkness. Think Victor Frankl. Maybe why the idea of hell has no power over me now. There is such a thing as hell on earth. I do not think anyone deserves this…why can’t we be a’ight with people dying and becoming dust, their bodies returning to the universe they were born into?

I read a whole lot of books as a child (many many religious, and many many otherwise). Maybe partly how I escaped the indoctrination. When I read religious writing now, it sounds utterly empty to me. It is the spiritual that has more depth to me now, and even there I find “spiritual” writing little consolation for knowledge of my impermanence. After 20 years of my life in boarding school, private Christian school, a private Christian college, then with a dad who was a pastor, it was as a young adult, away from religious indoctrination, I discovered what it means to live. I will never go back. I am fully willing to accept the possible condemnation of people living with my old beliefs, and if hell is anything like boarding school, then a good God (if such a thing existed) wouldn’t send me there anyway–no doubt whatsoever. I am not afraid. And I do not wish hell on another living person, although I think the world is a better place with some people dead.

I was not wounded by fundamentalist beliefs themselves (simply ideas), but by the isolation and abuse in my childhood produced by the people whose behaviors were encouraged by these beliefs. And of course, the horrible cognitive dissonance they produce in me once I was infected by them. To live an authentic life is to live a better life. To do otherwise would mean living untrue to myself. My mental health has never been better, it seems mostly outside factors are the ones I have to buffer. It may be a good analogy for the religious to think of people like me as dead to religion and the idea of God, but alive to life. To just give us up to God and pray for us instead of attempting to bring us back to old ideology. It is not as if I did not study it fully for a very long time. I am rejecting your faith with full knowledge of what you believe. I find these beliefs to be wrong.

It is kind of strange knowing how people view you when you leave the fold. I remember the days of trying to bring people to the fold myself. But when you understand the illogic of the brain, you understand humans. I continue to hold much respect for the human experience.

Posted in Reflections & Memories, thoughts | 2 Comments »

Christianity is a delusion (as is all religion)

Posted by Ann on March 7, 2011

This video makes me laugh. It seems so clearly obvious. And the tone of the narrator is spot on (and so polite, sorta). The video outlines why what you believe, if you believe in religion or god, is a delusion. If only it was as easy as emailing this out to all of my faithful family and friends who are living under the delusion of Christian normalcy.  Sometimes it feels as though I should be able to take people by the shoulders, look them in the eyes point blank, and shake them out of the spell woven by their own minds.  Or maybe pry their eyes open and make them watch this video a dozen times (I kid, of course). A deprogramming video from WhyWontGodHealAmputees.com (with credit to Loftus for pointing me there):

“Thinking is the solution. If you will turn on your brain, the depth of your delusion will become obvious to you, and you will be able to start down the path to recovery.”

Posted in Humor, thoughts, Video | Leave a Comment »

National Institute for Civil Discourse

Posted by Ann on March 1, 2011

Caveat to the reader: The following is my opinion. I absolve all other contributors from this site from guilt by association.

I just read a criticism of the newly established National Institute for Civil Discourse on PZ Meyers’ blog, Pharyngula:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/03/oh_yeah_thats_exactly_what_we.php

I am disturbed by his statement that the development of the National Institute for Civil Discourse with honorary chairmen former Presidents Clinton and Bush made him want to gag. Meyers, you make me want to gag (your opinion anyway). And I don’t agree with the quote by Bierce, “Politeness, n. The most acceptable hypocrisy.” Change does come from civil discourse, civil polite discourse involving honest, straightforward opinions (and communication of facts). I don’t think all opinions are equally valid. And politeness, when everyone knows it is politeness, is not hypocritical.

Posted in Opinion, thoughts | 2 Comments »

Review of “Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior”

Posted by Ann on February 20, 2011

Read a book review yesterday by John Loftus. It made a lot of sense to me, this idea that people are constantly falling into the mind traps of irrational thought…a hidden world of “sways” or pulls” trapping us into irrational thinking. People seem to be drawn to the irrational. I don’t find it surprising how much irrationality goes into faith. Sadly, this faulty decision making based in irrational values, fears, and biases more often than not results in the suffering and deaths of so many in our world. Until we are free of religious superstition, how can we possibly expect freedom from irrationality? Seems like our irrational selves can only be dealt with when we free our minds of the arrogant belief we are not irrational.

Here’s a little excerpt from his review:

The authors focus on three currents and hidden forces that cause us to act irrationally, “value attrition,” which is our inclination to attribute to a person or thing a certain value based on our initial perceptions, “loss aversion,” which is the tendency to go to great lengths to avoid possible losses, and “diagnosis bias,” which describes our blindness to all evidence that contradicts our initial assessment of a person or situation. In the midst of this they show other ways we’re influenced by the sway of irrational behavior.

About value attrition the authors say: “Once we attribute a value to a person or thing, it dramatically alters our perceptions of subsequent information.” (p. 55) And then “it’s very difficult to view it in any other light.” (p. 56). It is such “a strong force that it has the power to derail our objective and professional judgment.” (p. 63).

About loss aversion the authors say: “The more there is on the line, the easier it is to get swept into an irrational decision.” (p. 22). A closely linked sway is called “commitment.” The more that a person has a commitment to an idea then the more it is virtually impossible for him or her to take a different path. Independently these two forces have a powerful effect on us, “but when the two forces combine; it becomes that much harder to break free and do something else.” (p. 30).

About diagnosis bias the authors say that it “causes us to distort or even ignore objective data.” (p. 75). As such, “we often ignore all evidence that contradicts what we want to believe.” (p. 88)

The authors give us plenty of interesting examples and psychological studies proving that this is what human beings do in ordinary decision making, some of which cost the lives of many people. My argument is that if this is what takes place in our ordinary decision-making, then how much more does this apply when it comes to faith!

For some reason this is reminding me of Nietzsche when he wrote on how one becomes what one is:

Seeing that before long I must confront humanity with the most difficult demand ever made of it, it seems indispensable to me to say who I am. Really, one should know it, for I have not left myself “without testimony.” But the disproportion between the greatness of my task and the smallness of my contemporaries has found expression in the fact that one has neither heard nor even seen me. I live on my own credit; is it perhaps a mere prejudice that I live? … Under these circumstances I have a duty against which my habits, even more the pride of my instincts, revolt at bottom, namely, to say: Hear me! For I am such and such a person. Above all, do not mistake me for someone else!

At the end of their book, the Brafman brothers make a good summarizing statement. What if people accepted this idea of irrationality and began to actively identify the difference between their opinions and the facts?

“It is only by recognizing and understanding the hidden world of sways that we can hope to weaken their influence and curb their power over our thinking and our lives.” (p. 181).

Posted in Books, Links, Quotes, thoughts | 2 Comments »