An Open Letter to John C. Wright

[lydy]

When I was a Christian, I was a nihilist. The knowledge of an omniscient, omnipotent being filled me with despair. I felt small, ineffectual, and pointless. If the Creator of all could not prevent the pain and despair of the world, what could I possibly do? Getting right with God was all very well, in its way, but it felt empty and meaningless. What profit a man if he gain the world but lose his soul? Sure, yes, but what profit a man if he save his soul but cannot save the world?

Leaving the faith was my first step toward hope. When I consider the world, now, I don't see the hand of God. I see the glory of random chance, an infinity of possibility, narrowed over time to this exact instant, where everything that has gone before has led to this moment, and my choice, now, will change everything that happens from after this moment. It is both humbling and empowering. I cannot know if my choices are the right ones;, I cannot foresee all ends. But I know that what I do matters. And by observation, care, and thought, I can try to make better choices, choices that are better for myself and my world. I am the very opposite of a nihilist. I think that what I do matters, that my choices and my existence are important. When I abandoned a belief in life after death, I embraced the value of life here and now. Because this is the only life that I have, because when I die, all that will be left is the effect of my choices here and now, I care immensely about my actions. I take joy in life.

There are many roads to joy and hope. I know people who find that the reflection of God in nature leads them to care for their world, and the reflection of God in their fellow man lead them to love and care for others. This is not a road I can follow. But I can see it, and value it in other people. Joy, love, hope, faith, truth, these are all values we can share, no matter the road that leads us here.

A dear friend, many years ago, told me that it is very difficult to know the mind of God, but it is easy to see his works. This has freed me in so many ways. It has let me be friends with people of many faiths, and has helped me stop from criticizing people who are Atheist-ing wrong, or Christianing wrong. It is easy to see God's works. Love, charity, compassion, these things matter.

I would like to object, in the strongest terms, to the way you equate atheism, or belief in evolution, with nihilism. I am a joyful, hopeful person as an atheist. As a Christian, I was a hopeless, helpless nihilist. Not everyone walks the same path as I have walked, but that is ok. What is important is that we do God's work, even if we don't believe in him.

Comments

[ctein3.livejournal.com]

Dear Lydy,

I have not read John's ad hominems, and nothing inclines me to do so, but I think I got the gist.

For me it goes to a more extensive problem, which is the way so many people who hew to any belief system denigrate those who don't agree with them. It's not limited to theological and/or religious belief systems (which, philosophically, includes atheism and agnosticism— no they are not religions, but they are belief systems that address religious matters); one sees it in philosophy and OMG politics. On all sides.

It's that conviction that their belief is so obviously correct that anyone who fails to hold to it must be deficient or damaged— intellectually, emotionally, whatever— because that is the only possible explanation for them disagreeing with them.

And it's combined with the failure to recognize that all belief systems either devolve back to unprovable axioms or are genuinely circular in their reasoning.

That's not saying they're not good things, just that you cannot philosophize your way to Truth… Or even necessarily some semblance of Reality.

Where I live I don't personally much run into religious intolerance. Like pretty much, never. But living at the north end of Silicon Valley, the epicenter of techno-libertarian Rationalism and Skepticism, I hear exactly the same idiocies from the other side. The meta-conversations go rather like this (understand that “Me” and “Them” are just literary conveniences; these aren't real debaters, they are just playing them on TV):

Them: I don't understand people who believe in a god or an afterlife, they're just being irrational and illogical.

Me: Why is that irrational?

Them: Because there's no evidence for the existence of a god.

Me: Is there evidence against the existence of a god?

Them: No, but I don't have to show any such evidence. It's illogical to believe in a god unless there is evidence for a god.

Me: I'm afraid I'm not following that. It seems to me that we are lacking evidence, period. We are distinctly short of objective data on the subject.

Them: Yes, but if you're being scientific about it [equivalent to logical in their minds], you need evidence to believe in the existence of something. Otherwise you might as well believe in unicorns, because I can't prove they don't exist.

Me: Or, up until the early-middle of the 19th century you don't believe in atoms, because there's a lack of evidence that they exist. [Author's note: yeah, really––many important and major scientists didn't buy into atomic theory for quite some time.]

Them: Yeah, well I can't help it if you're not rational on the subject.

Me: … And we're done here.

Above and beyond the stupidity of the preceding conversation, there's a certain amount of irony involved, because several of the people who have engaged in such debates also firmly believe in cryonics— having their heads frozen upon their death so they can be reanimated later. Now, anyone who has more than even minimal knowledge of neurophysiology understands this is completely nonscientific. It is the epitome of a belief system, rather than an evidence-driven one. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest this is physically possible and several plausible lines of scientific argument that say it can't work.

But, we can't prove it won't work. Not today. So some of the Thems think it is entirely logical to freeze their heads. It's what any sensible person would do, because, you can't prove it WON'T work.

Uh-huh. Well, I don't know about THEIR heads, but I know that mine hurts about now.

So, yeah, in the minds of fanatical ideologues like John, you have to be deficient (beyond the fact that you're a woman**, which honestly, should be reason enough for any right-thinking human being). Heaven forbid someone should come to a different conclusion or, even worse, start with different axioms.

Literally, heaven forbid. [Ahem]


** even if you don't behave like a decent one should. (Thank God! [sic])

pax \ Ctein
[ Please excuse any word-salad. MacSpeech in training! ]
======================================
-- Ctein's Online Gallery http://ctein.com
-- Digital Restorations http://photo-repair.com
======================================