Without exception, they all said they were atheist or agnostic, and so I asked a follow-up question.
"So who believes that there is some entity somewhere that has direct influence over your day to day life"?
I got a completely confounding reply - universally. They all said "yes".
Having been what I am for a long time now, I knew to end the questioning right there and to get back to drinking champagne.
I've come to refine my "atheism" over time to have a broader definition (for me) than it once did. I don't even like the term any more - it seems so incendiary.
I now like to think is that I'm a "evidence based" person. If whatever you think has no evidence to back it up, no testable theory as to how it works, and no ability to predict future outcomes, then it's simply a belief. And I'll dismiss it outright.
A belief in a God is no different than a belief in the tooth fairy. Or Santa Claus. Or Bigfoot.
On the other hand, a prediction that the sun will rise tomorrow, that Vancouver will get rain, and that vaccinations prevent horrible disease, is based on science - evidence, testable theory, prediction.
I don't have "faith" that a chair will hold me up while sitting. I have "evidence" that it will - based on repeated, tested, predictable, experience.
Our entire lives are based on the evidence model. It enables us to do what we do. Fly in airplanes. Drive cars. Make cellular phone calls. Have an MRI. Cook food.
Everything we do is based on science, but most of us set all this reason aside in the belief in the supernatural.
What's up with that?
PS: I use the term "evidence" in place of the word "science" mostly because I get the same "rolling of the eyes" whenever I say I believe in science. Quite sad, actually.
PPS: There is a fantastic letter that Richard Dawkins wrote to his ten year old daughter here. It's a very short, very well thought out, essay. Read it regardless of what you believe.
No comments:
Post a Comment