Just listened to a really interesting philosopher, Alain de Botton, on Radio 2 with DJ Aled Jones - wasn't he a choir boy? Anyway back to the point which got my brain going: Alain de Botton has published a book called
Religion for Atheists. Some might call me an agnostic but I feel very 'decided' about my beliefs so I call myself 'an atheist'.
It was refreshing to hear someone on the radio speak a bit more positively about religion. I get tired of Richard Dawkins attitude towards religion. Sometimes Dawkins comes across as aggressive, in a spoilt-child sort of way. He is impatient with the simple naivety that he sees in religious fanatics and has difficulty in containing his feelings. Alain de Botton defines atheism as a non-belief
in the supernatural, as shown in the blurb on his website, http://www.alaindebotton.com . I don't. My atheism is defined as my non-belief in a controlling, supernatural being.
It is in the nature of things to be imperfect and I adhere to what might be called, a platonic view, with the purpose of life being to strive for perfection (not that I am anywhere near it). I also think that, as humans, we have a responsibility to give ourselves a purpose. But I believe
in the supernatural. I believe in ghosts, in the ability to predict the future, in faith healing, in the spirit of humanity, the spirit of the planet, and of the universe. I believe in the interconnectedness of everything. I'm not sure I believe in the soul. I don't understand how spirit can be separated from soul. I think it's the same thing.
I once experienced a meditative state which led me into a very temporary complete loss of memory. It was as though I became less than an atom, a proton, or neutron. I visualised myself speeding away from the earth, beyond the atmosphere, towards the moon. I could see our planet beneath me, the stars beyond. I was part of the stratosphere and conscious.
I realised for a moment that I couldn't remember
what I was. I couldn't identify myself. Then I remembered I had a name, children, that I was human etc. The point being, really, is that I could have been born anywhere, on any planet in the universe, as any creature, any miniscule speck of any thing. I am lucky enough to be born human on planet Earth, although not amounting to even a mere speck in the expanse of the universe - referred to as the religious element of
humility by Alain de Botton on Radio 2 this morning.
I did not become religious through my experience. Rather it confirmed my discomfort with religion. De Botton accurately called religion,
paradoxical, on the radio this morning. That is one of my personal major issues with religion. On the one hand, countries say it's wrong to kill; the same country also upholds the death penalty, or makes bombs. And I just can't believe in god. He/ it doesn't make any sense. God is outrageously inconsistent within all religions. Read Dawkins and probably de Botton's book,
Religion for Atheists for full details. In the face of our own doubts, Darwin's Theory of Evolution is logical and sensible.
Religious arguments are often used to further the aims of groups and individuals. It's true that religion also reminds us of kindness, and upholds the arts - two subjects generously covered by Alain de Botton this morning but if humanity is to move forward without religion, it is important to grasp the threads of morality and creativity without religious props while we still can.
Humanity is fast losing its faith in religion but science dismisses the supernatural. In doing so, science dismisses humanity. Humanity has a natural affinity for the supernatural. There is something in the human psyche connected to religious concepts - scientists are reported to have found a link in the brain a year or two back: http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbrain.shtml.
Calling myself
an atheist can sometimes feel like being stuck between a rock and hard place. I don't believe in god but I still pray. I don't believe in heaven, or hell or the devil and I struggle with the idea of pure good / pure evil . In fact, taking these two concepts into account only serves to show that purity is not necessarily perfection!
So in terms of my platonic empiricism, perfection is difficult to define, being more balanced than purity itself. So that too is paradoxical. The supernatural can often be explained in scientific terms but I am sure there is more to life than what we see. We can't see atoms but we believe they exist because science has 'proved' it. Science hasn't found a way to prove that ghosts exist, so dismisses them. It is up to science to learn
how to prove such things. I want science to embrace the supernatural, to engage with it, explore it; by doing so science will embrace spirituality without having to embrace illogical religion.
I have engaged with
the spirit of the planet within the experience of silence which de Botton touched upon today (see also, the Society of Friends website for details of prayer through silence). I think humanity is evolving away from religion and must delve into the spiritual. We must explore spirituality and aim to create a perfect planet.
The exploration of spirituality is not about concepts; it is the exploration of attaining balance, a scientific principal in order to attain fairness, arguably a qualitative concept, but it's up to humanity to explore the concept as atheists , not as fundamentalists. This can enable us to retain a connection with the human principals of kindness and creativity, so Alain de Botton's exploration of religion and atheism is further important step into working towards a perfect planet.
