There was a part of the second C.S. Lewis reading that i found particularly entertaining. It was the very beginning when he began to talk about atheists and religious persons in relation to each other. He said that being a christian doesn’t mean that you have to find complete fault in the other religions, but he did say that in being an atheist you had to accept that the religious people in the world were simply wrong. What interested me is the level of understanding and acceptance that each of these groups have with each other. I believe in God, i was raised in Roman Catholic family, and i went to Catholic school growing up, however, i accept that not everyone believes what i do. I understand that my beliefs may seem odd to some, but i try not to judge people based on this. What i’ve found is that an atheist that i have a conversation with will try to disprove what i believe in, as if it were that simple. i think that each religion has similarities with the next, and that we can learn from each of them if we are atheist or not. Believing in a religion doesn’t just teach you to believe in a higher power, but also teaches you trust, and loyalty to the higher power. Are not trust and loyalty admirable qualities? Atheism keeps you grounded, making you seek proof before blindly accepting something. That i think is admirable as well, only a fool would allow himself/herself to believe whatever he/she hears. Learning from both groups can give you many good/respectable qualities. Religion and atheism can teach you to be steadfast, accepting, loving, curious, and honest. No man should limit his learning sources.
Important Blog/Course Info
Categories
-
Recent Posts
- The final Paper for Epistemology
- You were all AWESOME! Thanks for the great experience Prof. Cullison!
- How I feel after the Epistemology Final
- I Can’t Get That Song Out of My Forearm.
- Research Post Revised
- Research Post – The Problem of Evil and the Morality of Free Will
- A personal Heaven
- Liar Liar Pants on Fire (Research Post)
- Research Post – God’s ability to know evil
- Very Irrelevant to Philosophy
-
Recent Comments
- Wayne Ceallaigh (Barone) on How I feel after the Epistemology Final
- Alice on How I feel after the Epistemology Final
- Andrew Cullison on How I feel after the Epistemology Final
- Wayne Ceallaigh (Barone) on How I feel after the Epistemology Final
- Wayne Ceallaigh (Barone) on Monday 200
- Wayne Ceallaigh (Barone) on Heaven and Free Will (Pawl and Timpe)
- Wayne Ceallaigh (Barone) on Monday 200 – I thought all dogs went to heaven
- Wayne Ceallaigh (Barone) on Research Post – Involuntary Sins
- Andrew Cullison on Second Graded Post
- Andrew Cullison on Second Graded Post- Salt Water Blues…
Useful Research Tools
Useful Software and Web Apps
Philosophy Journals
- Analysis
- American Philosophical Quarterly
- Australasian Journal of Philosophy
- Canadian Journal of Philosophy
- Ethics
- Journal of Ethics & Social Philosophy
- The Journal of Philosophy
- Mind
- Noûs
- Pacific Philosophical Quarterly
- Philo
- Philosophers' Imprint
- Philosophical Issues Philosophical Perspectives
- The Philosophical Quarterly
- The Philosophical Review
- Philosophical Studies
- Philosophy and Phenomenological Research
- Philosophy and Public Affairs
- Ratio
- Synthese
Philosophy Blogroll
Why Study Philosophy?
- THINK! (One Page Handout...Pass it On!)
- Why Major in Philosophy(more info)
Archives
SUBMIT POSSIBLE PAPERS HERE!
READ SOME RESEARCH POSTS
Research Posts (Edit your research post and check the "Research Post" category and it will show up when people click the above link)
4 Comments
You make a very good point in saying that trust and loyalty are admirable qualities, and the points that you make about each religion are true. But, being raised in a Roman Catholic Church, I was always taught to speak my opinions boldly and proudly. Whenever atheists start to question the Catholic faith, it seems as though they don’t have respect for what others believe in. Sure there are those few atheists who do listen and try to understand what you believe when you say why you think that, but mostly, I come across those who try to tear your religion apart and don’t necessarily listen or give you the chance to voice your opinions. I’m not trying to put down atheists or what they believe in, but when they don’t listen to your views or opinions, it is hard to think of them as trusting.
C.S Lewis did make a good point that each religion has to be understanding though. In order to fully be a well-rounded person and go deeper into your own faith, you have to be able to listen and understand someone else’s views, even if you do not agree with them. It is hard for most people, and I think that is the problem with most people of deep faith today. Even though they should be able to listen and understand another faith, they don’t, and that causes rifts and problems. Until each religion can fully accept and understand another’s views, people cannot follow the religious teachings of trust and loyalty.
To be an atheist requires adherence to the belief that no higher power exists. No all-knowing creator gives meaning to this world, and all that has substance is the stark, uncertain and many times unfair present, the meaning of which relies entirely on the individual’s personal realm of experience and exploration.
That’s no simple truth to own up to. This atheist trust in the present world begs just as much faith from its adherents as any other religious following. Thus, atheists are just as strongly committed to their logic as any Christian is to her God, and with the vast scope of mystery still existing in this world, the belief in no God has just as much evidence relative to the great quantity of the “unknown” as the belief that Jesus rose from the dead. At least they believe in something, right?
Above all, creating meaning is the only way for it to exist, no matter what meaning that is.
As an atheist, I have to say, we’re a proud people as well. However, due to our need for proof and backing by science, we tend to be a little hot headed as well. (At least I am anyway). That being said, hot-headed atheists, or even just anyone who understands the protocol of the argumentation paradigm, will (should) sit and wait until your point has been made, before we take science and counter your argument and provide our own.
If someone came up to you and said “Yeah, I believe that we’re the product of rainbow unicorns that secrete an ooze from their horns and when that ooze is collected, a universe is born. Oh, and these unicorns can do whatever they want, exist outside of time, you can’t see them, they know everything and can see the future and we don’t have any proof of their existence.” You would sit there and listen to his points and listen to him go on about these unicorns, but probably not without the highest degree of skepticism, and as soon as you got the chance you’d deliver your counter to his argument and then your own argument, and you would be passionate about it because you’re fairly confident your arguments are the better ones. I’m not making a mockery of religion and I don’t mean any offense comparing religion to Magic Unicorns, I just needed it to make a point.
Sure Religion teaches you to be trustworthy and loyal, but I’ve also witnessed kindergarten classes that teach kids to be trustworthy and loyal, sans God. When I was a kid I was taught that you should be good to other people, be trustworthy and loyal to other humans just because that’s the right thing to do, not because there is some higher power who commands it and certainly not because I want to get to heaven.
I think we have to be careful to differentiate between morality and religion. Often times, the two get confused with each other. A religion is an instituion of beliefs or faiths whereas morality is to me, an absolute. Morality does not change for example, killing is wrong. Yes, if you kill someone you are using that person as a means. You are not treating them as a moral agent, therefore killing is wrong. If you are using the subjectivist approach, you are saying morality is subjective for example it depends on your community as to what’s right or wrong. I think morality has right and wrong answers across the board. I mean why else would we create legal systems? If you are right in saying morality is relative, then no one should go to prison ever because to them they could have just been acting morally right but by courts standards been wrong. Thus, morality is not relative and religion is relative to every institution. Just thought this needed to be pointed out.