Tuesday, December 30, 2014

naytheist aggression

so today supertongue posted something that i felt obliged to respond to, and in the interests of sharing my opinions i reposted the following:
a friend of mine just wrote "calling atheism a religion is the same as calling baldness a hair color"
we don't have a better word for it, unfortunately. there're two types of atheism: there's one form where the atheist doesn't believe and doesn't give a shit if anybody else believes, and one in which the atheist doesn't believe but actively makes an effort to convince believers of other religions that they're wrong about god.
the latter has no faith, but they're definitely an organized system of belief that doesn't appreciate others' right to believe in whatever fantasies they choose.
which is precisely what we all use the word "religion" to describe.
i posted this, and then went back to work. by the time i got back to it war had broken out between the factions.

a lot of interesting points were made, but i'll just post my own conclusion here:
the lack of evidence for a thing does not imply the non-existence of that thing, only that that thing is extremely unlikely. yes, it's true, that's not very actionable, but a lot of time the correct action to take is no action when it comes down to it. unless someone is imposing their ridiculous beliefs on you, they have every right to their ridiculous beliefs just as you have to your not-ridiculous beliefs. because to them their beliefs aren't ridiculous, and those beliefs give their lives a narrative that they either desire or need.

as long as it's not harmful to anyone, it's okay, the moment it becomes threatening, kill it with fire before it lays eggs.

and regarding the science of things, the more we learn about this universe the more fascinating and bizarre it becomes. the kinds of things that have passed from impossible fantasy to the realm of possibility over the course of the last century is astounding to say the least. you know the fancy, expensive experiments to prove quantum physics right? those are scientists investing their lives on that stuff, continuing to chase established theoretical models in the face of the noticeable lack of supporting evidence. maybe they're right? there're incredibly interesting new theories that suggest that they've all been on the wrong path. but that's science for you.

No comments: