From: sbjensen@midway.uchicago.edu (Steuard Jensen)
Subject: OT: Re: New Religious Argument
Date: 2000/06/04
Message-ID: <Hik_4.285$x3.4767@uchinews>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien


Quoth beatricecaldwell@earthlink.net [Flame of the West(?)]:
> Prembone wrote:
> > I am an atheist, or more precisely, a secular humanist, because I
> > think, and have found, that it is the most sane, satisfying, and
> > in-alignment-with-reality way of living and believing of all the
> > options I've seen thus far.
 
> That can only be if you ignore the big philosophical and
> cosmological questions.  Atheism has no answers to the
> ultimate questions of existence, and so must view the
> world through a tunnel vision.  It's only possible to be an
> atheist if you wear blinders.

Flame, I minored in philosophy in college.  I've given more thought to
philosophical issues and the "big philosophical and cosmological
questions" than most people I've known, religious or otherwise (and
that's not even including the _science_ of cosmology :) ).  And yet, I
feel very close to the same sentiments that Prembone stated above.

It's true that atheism (or, in my case, some variant on agnosticism or
deism) doesn't have _answers_ to the ultimate questions of existence,
but I'm okay with that: I want answers that I _feel_ to be right (or
better, that I have strong "scientific" evidence for), rather than
answers that I've simply been told by someone who was told by someone
who was told...  When answers that meet those (admittedly high)
standards aren't available, I just ponder the questions and gaze in
awe and reverence upon the universe that gave rise to them.  I
certainly don't abandon my search for truth and just believe something
for the sake of having a final answer.  (One of the wonderful things
about working in science is the chance to be eternally seeking a
deeper knowledge of the world.  If that experience is beautiful
because I am "coming closer to the mind of God", then great.  If not,
well, it's not one bit less of a joy for me.)

In fact, and I hope you and the other Christians in this discussion
don't take it amiss, it seems to me that those who have a specific
faith and believe firmly in specific answers to those "ultimate
questions of existence" are the ones with blinders on.  How is it more
blind to consider a wide range of answers to a question than to
believe firmly in one?  How is it tunnel vision to contemplate a
variety of possible explanations for our glorious world rather than
adopting one explanation a priori?

Believe me, I _do_ find the breathtaking complexity from simplicity of
nature to be truly wonderful and holy.  I don't feel that my life
lacks a spiritual dimension, despite my lack of a belief in an active
God (or Gods).  All it takes is a chance to gaze into the starry
heavens on a clear night away from city lights to refresh the deepest
core of my being.  Given that, in what sense am I more blind than you?
In what sense am I the one looking through a tunnel?

[If I were the easily offended type, I think I would have seen your
post as a deep insult to my beliefs.  As it is, I felt that it
deserved a response, but I suspect that you posted more from ignorance
of the way that I (and others like me) see the world than from a
desire to attack me personally.  Still, you really should be careful
in religious discussions that your comments are at least not
_directly_ insulting to others' beliefs.  You've asked as much from
the athiests and agnostics in this very thread; we'd appreciate it if
you and the other Christians here would extend us the same courtesy.]

						Steuard Jensen