Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Reflections of a Romantic Agnostic

With apologies to residenttraveler who I know intends to write about this very topic in his excellent blog. I Just had a long debate with the aforementioned rez and my 2 beloved cousins, which prompted me to write this post.

I'm an agnostic. I don't believe anyone has a proof of God's existence, or lack thereof. The way I see it, the notion of God is sufficiently abstract, so as to transcend any rationalistic proof either way.

Pretty standard world view. No chidush here.

We now face the question: which is more appealing: a world with God, or that without.

In my view there is something very empty and uninspiring about atheism. I'm sorry, but waking up in the morning and knowing there is no God, doesn't make me want to run in the fields and smell the flowers. To me, the search for meaning ends quite abruptly in such a world. There is no meaning{1}. The sunset is just some light on the horizon. My friends don't really love me, and I don't love them: it's just egotistical interests, survival instincts. All is random and arbitrary. Morality is left in the hands of man: a pathetic and ruthless animal.

Now this may very well be true. I don't deny it. But I find it very unromantic.

I like to think there is some emotional meaning behind all things. A beautiful sunset is something to be enjoyed, it symbolizes the end of a day, the fall of night, the tranquility of nature, warmth. When I hear an emotionally moving song, I am moved because the song was written by an author who felt these emotions and wanted to share them with me. If I were later to find out that this song was actually generated by a random process in some sophisticated computer; it would take the fun out it. I would have to cynically look at my enjoyment of the song as a chemical process in my brain. In the same way, to me, thinking there is some "author" to the world, just might give things more meaning.

Now of course, I know nature is harsh and cruel, humans are evil, and life basically sucks. I know all this. We are probably all doomed and abandoned. But c'mon, where's the fun in that?

So no, I don't know that there is a God, but I must say that the notion that there is some hidden meaning to all of this craziness we live in, makes things just a bit more romantic{2}.

Candle-lit dinner in Paris, anyone?

--Notes--
{1} I am taking things to an extreme here to emphasize my point, I do realize that many atheists do believe there's meaning to the world. To these people, God is not necessary to experience love and other emotions. Still, there's a certain discouraging je ne sais quoi about this belief, even though it may well be true. I will go so far as to understand how the knowledge that there is no God, and that we are essentially abandoned to our own fate, can be quite exhilirating, on an ironic level.

{2} According to what I see in Wikipedia on agnosticism, I might be considered a Spiritual Agnostic. Hooray, my views are unoriginal!

Labels: , , ,

12 Comments:

At 7:03 PM, Blogger Noa said...

*sniff*

No need for wikipedia, we were conditioned at home to have this particular view. They baked it into the Dads' Pizza.

I'll try to remember to light candles tonight at dinner.

 
At 7:33 PM, Blogger Dooby said...

And there I was thinking I was rebellious ;-)

I'm pretty sure nobody ever tried to introduce me to the concept of agnosticism at home, though it might've been done so subtly I didn't notice... come to think of it, those Dads' pizzas did taste a little funny.

 
At 2:58 AM, Blogger Luc said...

You haven't read the FAQ on God, http://www.400monkeys.com/God/

 
At 3:50 PM, Blogger Z-Man said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 4:03 PM, Blogger Z-Man said...

The way I see it, the God you are defining is romance.

Therefore, according to you, there is no romance without a God. But you yourself admitted in one of your footnotes that some Atheist have witnessed "romance".

How do you tame that donkey?

 
At 4:21 PM, Blogger Josh said...

Here's my take (round 1): http://tinyurl.com/y2huuk

 
At 4:36 PM, Blogger Dooby said...

Well I don't equate God with romance. I'm just saying if there is a God it would imply that there is some meaning to the world and to life. It's just a romantic approach of looking at things. The atheistic approach of accepting life at face value: "what we have is what there is", is less romantic in my view, but perhaps braver.


After writing this post last night I was wondering if anybody ever offered the following proof of God's existence:
1. love can only exist if there is a God.
2. love exists
3. therefore God exists

Of course the weak part of this proof is that statement 1 cannot be affirmed.
Wikipedia has shown me that this type of proof has in fact been tried in the past (with such variations as replacing "love" with "morality", "science", etc)

 
At 5:44 PM, Blogger Dooby said...

Zach I will try to answer your "donkey" question.

To be sure, we're all people with emotions, capable of experiencing romance, regardless of whether or not we believe in God.

In my post, I gave the example of being moved by a song. When we are moved by a song, we are tapping in to some deeper meaning created by the song's author (intentionally or not). If the song's author is some highly sophisticated computer, and yet we are still moved by it, then we must adopt a more cynical view of our enjoyment: the song has no meaning, it is I the listener who gives it it's meaning, but between you and me, I know it's a load of bollocks.

(Of course this leads to a new argument: a highly sophisticated computer capable of writing a moving song is essentially the same as a human author. Sort of like the pantheistic approach of Nature is God.)

OK I'm rambling...

 
At 2:35 AM, Blogger Noa said...

I agree with Zach, it's all a matter of definitions.

Re. the donkey, atheists experience God under other names (here, 'Romance', but applies to other ideas). The 'God' definition is a more theatrical (more romantic) representation of these ideas.

The atheist and the agnostic don't use the same definition of God anyway: the latter's definition doesn't lend itself to negation.

Dinner yesterday was served out of the plastic microwave dishes it was cooked in. I'll see if I can get the candles happening today.

off to read shnoo.gr..

 
At 6:42 AM, Blogger Resident Traveler said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 6:54 AM, Blogger Resident Traveler said...

Regarding your love->god reasoning, the flaw is indeed in #1 (and it's not for differing definitions of love).

You're assuming something which no atheist or even agnostic would see eye to eye with you on. That you have a deeply held feeling that without god there isn't love, while certainly legitimate, can't serve as any kind of proof to an agnostic who simply doesn't see the need for "god" for there to be love. That understanding is a gut feeling, an instinct, which your fellow agnostic/atheist doesn't share. (And yet they go right on lovin'..)

To tell the truth, I'm not exactly clear how the reasoning works even in theory, unless you insist that the reason is "because god created love". but to begin with, most theist's claim is that god made everything.. both are circular arguments, considered to be logical fallacies.

 
At 7:31 AM, Blogger Resident Traveler said...

I'd like like to bridge these two main opposing views a little, inasmuch as Dooby is a declared Agnostic:

Dooby, I think the problem you really have with atheism is its seeming lack of human empathy/sympathy/motivation/emotion. Remember, though, that atheism only means a disbelief in the existence of a god, nothing more. It doesn't preclude the existence of feelings, emotions, quirkiness, joi d'vivre, or anything else. You might have some deeply-held feeling that atheists tend to somehow disregard them or diminish their importantance, but that's not the atheism "talking", it's a personal disposition or a world view. As we know, there are many scientists who are theists, despite the "cold" nature of their work. I would differentiate between an overly intellectual/rantionalistic personal disposition, and atheism.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home