The Arrogance of Ignorance
While contemplating the ludicrous scribblings of an apologist, I had an epiphany. Creationists, and other people who allow religion to limit their thinking, do not only fail to have any curiosity (because their religion already has all the answers), but they persecute anyone who is curious. Consider the whole concept of a geocentric universe: Once you believe a story that says a magic invisible man created Earth for humans and gave us a light bulb called the sun, you’re all done. There’s no need to consider the sun rising in the morning or setting in the evening. Obviously the sun is a mere accessory for Earth — we are the center of the universe as we know it.
Then some guy has the nerve to make observations, write things down, do some math, and ask questions. With nothing other than solid evidence to back him up, he claims that Earth orbits the sun. What happens? The Catholic Church persecutes him and places him under house arrest until his death.
Of course, now that the fact is completely indisputable, the church has apologized. But that’s not the point. That they were completely wrong is not the problem at all. People are wrong all the time, and they disagree with others all the time. What is so aggregious about their behavior is that they forced their self-imposed limitations on others. It’s like being afraid of the monster under the bed, but refusing to turn on the light and look. Silly, sure. But when it becomes evil is when you punish your brother for trying to check under the bed himself.
For those who choose to limit their sphere of knowledge, that is a sad thing indeed. But inflicting your ignorance on others is just evil.
September 4th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Unfortunately I have to agree with a lot of your writing in this article. Allow me to introduce myself a little, I’m an independent Christian, don’t belong to any denomination, my thoughts about Christianity are my own and everybody is free to form/have their own opinion about believing in something yes or no. I think your article proves (and that’s why I started with unfortunately as first word) that religion (and in this case Christianity as I understand from your writing) is often used or more precisely mis-used to proclaim power over people. You are referring in this article to how much Christianity in general has tried to “hold science down” and you are right in your observence and I must say that I like the “forgiving” (not meant like forgiving in religious sence) part in your article about that it’s normal for people to be wrong. What I don’t agree with is using these mistaken viewpoints of Christianity to say that all Christians are people with self-imposed limits in thinking, that they limit their sphere of knowledge. It is always wrong to force your point of view onto other people, wether it be atheist or theist points of view. I can only speak for myself but if I look at how I experience my thoughts on Christianity and how I read the bible (a collection/selection of books, letters, etc. made into a canon) I only see that if you appreciate the works of God (or the Lord, Creator, Supreme being, Whatever) you should study them. In true Christianity science and explaining how things really work is about seeing more of the beauty that is the creation.
Regards,
Sander
September 4th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
I applaud your intellectual honesty here, agreeing with something that makes sense to you despite the fact that the person who wrote the words disagrees with you on some fundamental things.
In fact, I wonder why you use the word “unfortunately” at all. If you and I agree, then we have a basis for a dialog. If we can’t start from common ground then we can’t have a discussion at all. If we can find the earliest point at which our thinking diverges, we have the perfect starting off point for our discussion.
I do think that all Christians (not that I’m limiting this to Christianity) have limits on their thinking and sphere of knowledge. That is because, and I think we can agree on this also, they all have faith. The very definition of faith is believing something without any objective reason to think it is true (if the fundamental points of Christianity were objectively proven, we’d all be Christians). This faith comes with a large set of required beliefs about the natural world. Granted, the exact set of beliefs varies from denomination to denomination, but they exist. Anything that is proven by science to be reality (such as evolution or the age of the Earth, in many cases) which is at odds with their faith-based beliefs is immediately shown the door without so much as a moment of consideration. I think that this proves beyond any argument that Christians are incapable of accepting some indisputable facts as true without changing what it is that they believe being a Christian is.
Note that this does not automatically mean that Christians are stupid, or necessarily less intelligent than anyone of any other religion or no religion at all. Without a doubt, there are many brilliant Christians who are way smarter than I am. But when it comes to an issue such as the common descent of humans and other animals, any Christian who denies the facts has punched a large hole in their education, leaving me way ahead in at least one area of study.
I have some more thoughts on this, but this comment is already very long and it’s very late. I look forward to your reply.
Shawn
September 4th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
One quick note: I have to correct something you said above. You and I agree that people shouldn’t force their views upon others. However, you mentioned “atheist or theist points of view.” There is no such thing as an atheist point of view. An atheist is just like a Christian (they don’t believe in any non-Christian religions), except that they don’t believe in the Christian one either. If you’re a Muslim, then atheists are exactly like you (they don’t believe in any non-Muslim religions), but they don’t believe in Islam either.
“Not believing” in something isn’t a point of view, and it does not inform one’s actions. Example: If a Christian believes that doing a thing is considered good by their god, they may do the thing. An atheist doesn’t specifically avoid doing that thing just because they don’t believe in the god, nor do they go out of their way to do anything else because they don’t believe in the god.
Shawn
September 5th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
Hey Shawn,
I’d like to start with your last reply, we agree that people shouldn’t force their views upon others, that’s a good thing, still makes me wonder why I see a lot more atheist people ridicule theist people than the other way around, though I must admit that I read more discussions on atheist forums than on theist forums because (and it’s sad to say/admit this) a lot of atheist people make more sense to me for having their own opinion which they can explain and not a “common” shared one that should represent the ultimate knowledge or something silly like that. But having said that I have to “correct you back”, pretty sure that isn’t very good English ;-). You say that there isn’t such a thing as an atheist point of view, don’t want to play the role of the smartass here but didn’t the atheist movements like Russia under Stalin, China under Mao, Cambodja under Pol Pot and Germany under Hitler tried to force their view upon the people, banning and prosecuting religion just like theist movements have done? If we fully want to agree on the part that people shouldn’t force their views upon others you must also realise that theist as well as atheist viewpoints can be forced upon people. Hope you will agree with me on that.
OK, back to the first reply, thank you for your respect for someone who disagrees with you, it’s good to agree to disagree because that is the basis for dialog, like you mentioned.
Let’s focus on how you paint your point of view with your hypothesis that Christians limit their thinking and sphere of knowledge.If I look at the things you write I see an image of Christianity which points out that there are some mandatory things to believe to be a Christian, I disagree with you on that. What I agree on with you is that there is a majority of people calling themselves Christians who are either “blinded by the light” or have never really asked themselves why they believe.
I noticed in the third and fouth part of your reply that you are a supporter of the evolution-theory, I wonder why you have such “faith” in a 120yr old study that has as much holes in it like the biblical explanation for life has. Darwin’s “missing links” are still not found (and you can ask any paleontologist about that). Yes there are bones, stones and other organic materials that prove that the material is older then just a few thousand years and therefore are in dispute with the biblical explanation about the start/creation of earth/life. Still there is no 100% proof scientific evidence for the evolution-theory, just like there is no 100% proof scientific evidence for the things that make up my view on “my Christianity/Faith” From my point of view I believe that you limit your sphere of knowledge by believing that everything is just chemical/electrical/biological reaction, consequence without cause.
I like to close this comment with your words:
I have some more thoughts on this, but this comment is already very long.
Regards,
Sander
September 6th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Uh oh. Now I have a major problem. On the one hand, you have been polite, respectful, and rational thus far, and so I feel the need to continue to be polite and respectful to you. On the other hand, you have repeated some of the most ignorant statements theists tend to make.
Okay, assuming that you actually care about whether what you say is true, I will continue. If you don’t care if whether what you believe is true, and will continue to believe it in the face of evidence to the contrary, then you may as well stop reading and go to a theist forum.
1. Hitler was a Roman Catholic, supported in his decimation of the Jewish population by the Pope and the Vatican. Even if he wasn’t, however, nothing about what he did was motivated by atheism. He did what he did for the same reason every warlord in history did. He never said “since there is no god, let’s kill the Jews and take over all of Europe.” That’s just ridiculous. Further, in his book “Mein Kampf” and in some of his public speeches he mentions his Christian faith.
2. Stalin was an atheist. However, once again, nothing he did was “in the name of atheism.” He did what he did because of his belief in communism and his own lust for power. He never did anything “in the name of atheism,” because atheism has no tenets.
3. The same for Mao and Pol Pot. It’s just plain ignorant to attribute their actions to atheism just because they were both atheists. Consider this: The vast majority of prisoners in the United States prison system are Christians. Can we assume from this that Christianity is responsible for their crimes?
4. I have no “faith” in evolution. Evolution and the age of the earth are absolute fact and can not be disputed by anyone who actually understands any of it. There is a relentless mountain of evidence, both in fossils and in DNA. If you ask any paleontologist, he will affirm this. You are simply repeating bad information you heard from those who can not be honest about the subject because it violates their dogma.
So, here is the test. If you contradict anything I have said here, do so with evidence. Quote books, scientists, facts, and figures. I know for a fact that you can not. If you are an intellectually honest person, you will realize this also and our future discussions will bear much fruit, and I will gain an enormous amount of personal respect for you.
For the record, quotes and books by religious apologists are not acceptable. If something is a fact, it is neutral and agreed upon by anyone without an agenda. You may cry foul, saying this is an unfair restriction. However, I’m only saying it to save time. For one, everything the apologists claim is based not on science, but dogma. They begin with their conclusions and cherry-pick the facts that don’t contradict it. However, real scientists begin with the facts and figure out the conclusions from there.
Secondly, and I think you and I can agree on this already, lots of people of different religions and of no religion accept the fact of evolution. (We say “accept” because there’s nothing to “believe” — the proof is there.) No atheists deny evolution — only believers. That pretty much proves that only irrational faith provides a basis for denying the truth of this matter.
I look forward to your reply. I honestly hope that you will seek out facts and truth before replying. At the moment, you are living your life and making decisions based upon things other people told you which are completely wrong. I can not claim to know the motivations of the people spreading those lies, because many of them came to believe those lies the same way — repetition of nonsense spread from generation to generation. I hope you break the chain of ignorance and rise to the next level. I don’t care at all if you accept evolution while still believing in your god. I’m not trying to talk you out of Christianity here — just free you from ignorance which is embarrassing to me to see an obviously intelligent and thoughtful human being trapped in.
I beg of you, do not react to what I have written above. Think about it first. Pray about it, if you like. Consider my words, and re-read them. Understand them in the spirit of brotherhood in which they were intended. I am not you opponent, but your brother in this fascinating world of ours, and I want only for us to be joined in reason, not divided in faith.
Most sincerely,
Shawn
September 18th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Hey Shawn,
OK, took my time to think about it, wrote a big reply but canceled it because of this:
So, here is the test. If you contradict anything I have said here, do so with evidence. Quote books, scientists, facts, and figures. I know for a fact that you can not. If you are an intellectually honest person, you will realize this also and our future discussions will bear much fruit, and I will gain an enormous amount of personal respect for you.
For the record, quotes and books by religious apologists are not acceptable. If something is a fact, it is neutral and agreed upon by anyone without an agenda. You may cry foul, saying this is an unfair restriction. However, I’m only saying it to save time. For one, everything the apologists claim is based not on science, but dogma. They begin with their conclusions and cherry-pick the facts that don’t contradict it. However, real scientists begin with the facts and figure out the conclusions from there.
I am sorry that it took me a while to react, been away for a while and needed some extra time to figure out what you really meant. To be honest, I question if we can ever have a discussion without prejudice, I like your mentioning the: “our future discussions will bear much fruit”, I know you don’t mean that in a mocking way (though you prefer to exclude everything that disagrees with you). But still, our discussion untill now leads to nothing. Please feel free to contact me for maybe smaller discussions on a more private basis.
Sincerly,
Sander
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Met you in WOW (azuremyst). Love the site! I bookmarked it so I can catch up reading it. Keep up the good work! If you ever need a healer for anything look me up.