Statement of (dis)Beliefs
In response to a comment by boywonder, I have composed 10 statements that sum up my beliefs and biases. In addition to this post, there will be a permanent link to this list on the sidebar.
1. There are no gods, demigods, angels, devils, fairies, ghosts, gnomes, imps, elves, demons, sprites, goblins, leprechauns, trolls, incubi, succubi, genies, mermaids, banshees or the like.
2. The concept of “supernatural” is absurd and meaningless. Anything that exists is completely and totally natural.
3. There is nothing that cannot be fully understood given enough study, sufficient brainpower and a firm grasp of logic.
4. Omnipotence is impossible. Don’t make me get into the heavy rock paradox. It’s old and tired.
5. If you say something exists, and I say it doesn’t, the burden of proof is on you. For you to prove that it does exist, you just have to demonstrate it to me. For me to prove that it doesn’t exist, I have to demonstrate to you every single thing that exists, and then you’ll just say that it’s invisible or that I must have missed it.
6. When something is proven, I believe it. When something is unproven, I don’t. I’m funny that way.
7. Just because you call something proof, doesn’t mean it’s proof. Proof is at my discretion. My criteria rely heavily on the scientific method and my senses. That’s all I have. My heart does nothing but move blood around my body.
8. Religion, while not always destructive, has a long history of starting wars, inciting persecution and hindering the pursuit of truth and knowledge. Even a seemingly harmless faith will, given enough time, mutate into something obstructionist, dangerous or both.
9. While religion played an instrumental role in helping civilization past its infancy, it has done more harm than good for the last several thousand years. It is in the best interest of mankind that religion be completely eliminated.
10. The two most dangerous religious movements in the world today are Muslim Fundamentalism and Christian Reconstructionism. The destruction of these philosophies is the highest priority.
~I AM~
June 3rd, 2005 at at 1:11 am
Wow! You don’t waste any time! I’m liking this site more and more all the time. I admire the straight forward, in your face, blam! here’s the way it is approach. I tried to find faults in your statements, but they mirror mine almost eerily. The only criticism (if you call it one) is that maybe a little more eloquence in your statements might not turn off as many people. I find being blunt, while to the point and concise, is often taken as arrogance and the like. I don’t mind that, but your more timid viewers might. I suppose these statements will be revised, edited, and expanded as time goes on anyway, but good job!
June 3rd, 2005 at at 2:16 am
8-10 I couldnt agree with you more..
June 3rd, 2005 at at 7:08 am
Outstanding! You really should be proud of this one, and I encourage you to submit it to the next Carnival of the Godless. Not only have you done a great job of summarizing your own positions, but this could be used to accomplish the same goal for many of us.
June 3rd, 2005 at at 7:22 am
Here is some constructive criticism:
Be careful with #6. Much of what we believe has technically not been “proven,” and scientists rarely talk about proof in this way. I think it is safer to base beliefs on something like a consensus of the scientific community. For example, it is technically impossible to “prove” the theory of evolution without a time machine. Personally, I believe it because I trust the scientific community (especially when support is near unanimous).
Regarding #7, it comes off as somewhat arrogant to say that proof is at your discretion. There has to be some sort of accepted standard in the scientific community so that this determiniation is not so arbitrary.
Finally, and this reflects one of my biases, I’d add something about how even moderate religious belief is maladaptive and provide reasons why.
June 3rd, 2005 at at 7:26 am
Evangelical Atheist’s Statement of (dis)Beliefs
The Evangelical Atheist blog is one I visit regularly and one that deserves a spot in the Blogroll of every atheist. Make sure you read the recent Statement of (dis)Belief post. I think you will find that it sums up how most of us feel extremely well…
June 3rd, 2005 at at 8:17 am
Very well done — almost a “manifesto” for we atheists! I particularly like #1 and #5.
June 3rd, 2005 at at 8:45 am
vjack:
On #6, I don’t blindly accept evolution as fact. I think it’s the strongest working model we have, but I don’t KNOW it’s true. I don’t do anything by consensus. If you look back in time (and not terribly far) you will find all kinds of ridiculous theories for which there was a consensus in the scientific community. Is evolution the next flat earth or heliocentric model of the universe? I don’t know, but I’ll bet there’s one out there as we speak.
On #7, I don’t trust anyone else to accept or reject proof for me. Besides, this really helps with #6.
Finally, I believe that if “moderate” religious belief could exist, by itself, in perpetuity, I would be content to let it be. Mild theism only harms the theist. I support anyone’s right to harm themselves in ways that don’t harm others.
June 3rd, 2005 at at 9:13 am
Since there are 10 of them, I have to wonder if we can get these posted outside and inside courthouses across the country. Preferably in some kind of heavy rock.
June 3rd, 2005 at at 9:35 am
I also agree that #6 and #7, when taken together, make good sense. It can also be cumbersome in discussion to use the formal definition of “proof”, as it only really applies to mathematics, and then a philosopher might argue whether we can prove anything at all. And to boywonder, more eloquence might mean it would take him more time, and we’d get less posts to read. I don’t know that the blunt method is really less effective anyway. Once a religious person is open-minded enough to start honestly questioning and doubting their beliefs, it generally won’t take them too long to become atheist or agnostic (especially if they have the internet).
And haha GeneralZod, that’s two days in a row you’ve said something entertaining. If gay marriage is legalized, ya wanna?
I’m just kidding
June 3rd, 2005 at at 4:55 pm
I agree with everything there, and I understand how you are using “proof” here, but I want to add my two cents in with vjack and Delta. “Proof” strictly used only applies to mathematics and logic. What we really rely upon is a) evidence that supplies credence to a theory beyond a reasonable doubt, b) logic and c) trust/faith in the proposition that the members of the scientific community aren’t lying to us, and this trust is in no sense religious, because we have very good evidential reasons for believing that proposition.
June 3rd, 2005 at at 5:51 pm
These should be made into a flyer and in the style of Martin Luther nailed to every church door.
June 3rd, 2005 at at 7:05 pm
nanovirus: I put a lot of time into this blog already. I’m not writing 85 more of these.
June 3rd, 2005 at at 7:56 pm
Delta, I agree more eloquent statements are not necessary. Like I said, I prefer the straight to the point approach. And as quickly as I Am posted these, they are great. If I think of a great speaker stating these claims to an audience, then I am inclined to think he/she would have to be a little more flowery in his/her approach. I ran into this argument with my philosophy prof. He felt it was psychologically advantageous to charm the audience. I felt direct and hard hitting was effective. I now agree with my prof’s opinion since I’ve become an avid poker player. I realize poker is not philosophy, but you’d be surprised by the similarities. There is a definite art form to taking someone’s money. It is even better when you do it without them even being aware of it and make them feel good in the process. They will invite you back again and again to take their money. I suppose the point here is this: You speak to a layman in laymen’s terms. All the while giving no ground on your position. The art is in the convincing.
June 3rd, 2005 at at 11:00 pm
Yes, you are definitely correct that if you charm the audience you have a much better time of them being receptive of your message. I didn’t really see this thread to be an attempt at changing anyone’s mind, but more of a “background info” of sorts. I agree with what you said though, are you a philosophy major or just interested in it?
June 4th, 2005 at at 7:47 am
I’m not suggesting that we blindy accept evolution as fact; I’m suggesting that we rely on the scientific community to critically evaluate the evidence and that we interpret their consensus as increasing the probabaility that the theory is an accurate description of our world. I do not believe for a minute that you do not do anything by consensus. Unless you are a physician, you rely on medical consensus in guiding your health care decisions. You “believe” that antibiotics are useful for treating infection because you have some level of trust in the medical community and the scientific research they produce. That is the beauty of science: consensus does change, and our beliefs are supposed to change with it. This is what distinguishes thinking individuals from Christians; our belief systems are not set in stone and will change as necessary.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on the issue of moderate religious belief. Mild theism does harm the theist, but it also creates a context in which religious extremism can thrive, enjoying its current status as something politically incorrect to criticize. I’ll try to do a better job of building this case in the future.
June 4th, 2005 at at 10:46 am
vjack:
OK. I’ll grant you that I accept scientific consensus as increasing the probability of the accuracy of a theory. However, your antibiotic example is a poor one. I KNOW that antibiotics work because it’s been PROVEN (see #7). Antibiotics are not a theory. I would extend that to all prescription drugs. As bad a track record as the FDA has lately, they do require strong scientific evidence of efficacy before approving a drug. Based on recent events, I don’t necessarily believe the drug won’t kill me in some other nasty way, but I do believe it will help me with what ails me (at least based on the probabilities given in the documentation).
On mild religion, you’re making the same point I am.
That’s basically what I said. If that weren’t the case, and mild belief could exist in a vacuum without producing that threat, it would be a different story.
June 4th, 2005 at at 1:42 pm
Boywonder, in response to: “I find being blunt, while to the point and concise, is often taken as arrogance and the like. I don’t mind that, but your more timid viewers might. I suppose these statements will be revised, edited, and expanded as time goes on anyway…”
A) This is no place for the timid. Stand up for what you disbelieve! Atheism isn’t for the faint of heart.
B) I don’t get the impression that I AM is the kind of person who does a whole lot of revisions. I get the distinct impression he’s very careful in what he says and how he says it.
C) As for you later reply, re: flowery philosophy professors… I see his point, but I AM hasn’t exactly struck me as the “flowery” type. Furthermore, I believe there is a certain charm in straightforwardness. The truly intelligent among us don’t need a load of BS to be convinced.
Just my opinions/thoughts… take them as you will.
June 4th, 2005 at at 2:41 pm
Very well said!!
By the way, no genies? I can’t keep looking for my magic lamp to save me from this crazy world?
June 4th, 2005 at at 4:53 pm
Speaking of mild faith, has anyone read The End of Faith by Sam Harris, published last fall? Among other things, it argues in depth that religious moderates are dangerous because of the environment they create for religious extremists.
June 4th, 2005 at at 5:20 pm
Delta, Philosophy is a passion of mine. But I am no expert in any subject. I subscribe to the ‘know a little about a lot’ theory, not the ‘know everything about a little’ theory. I would like to say I know a lot about a lot, but interestingly, the more you learn, the more you realize you don’t know.
addict_no_more, Yes there is an eloquence in itself about being short and to the point. Perhaps I Am’s statements don’t need to be flowery. Yes, from the little I’ve read of I Am’s writngs, he seems not to be the flowery type. I find eloquence to be the art of combining wit and wisdom with facts and opinions to produce works that are both correct and entertaining. I think of Mark Twain offhand. He could have been more straightforward in his writings, but he would not have been as interesting or entertaining if he did;and hence, less popular. Statement #1 is a good example. Either I Am can keep adding to this list ad infinitum (such as Angie’s suggestion of Jinns) or he could simplify the statement by saying something to the effect of “There exists in this world no creatures of mythical origins. God and gods alike share their existence from the imaginations of man.” I feel like I’m beating a dead horse, though. I understand these are simply statements of belief and I’m probably being too picky.
June 4th, 2005 at at 6:40 pm
I do have a question for you. And maybe it is a silly question as I have just come across your blog in the past week. And I could probably be asking everyone who replies here the same question..
How does your family feel about your beliefs? Do they believe like you do?
I ask because I am the only one in my family on my side and my husbands side who feels believes what I do. I am constantly at odds with them over God and how they think I should believe and feel..
June 5th, 2005 at at 2:18 am
Ivy, I am the only atheist in my family, and ironically the only one who, when a believer, actually went to church and participated in religion. However, since they don’t really agree with organized religions, they don’t give me too much trouble over being an atheist.
June 5th, 2005 at at 2:34 am
I come from a family of A&P Catholics. They go to mass on Ash Wednesday and Palm Sunday, whenever there’s a “prize.” My father is an atheist, but wasn’t permitted to tell me so when I was a child. I didn’t find out until I was out of college. He’s satisfied to disbelieve quietly. I raise the issue with the rest of them from time to time and try to make the believers see how silly it all is. They change the subject as quickly as possible, because they learned a long time ago that they can’t win arguments with me.
If you want my advice (which you seem to), hold fast, and make no apologies. If the opportunity arises to discuss god, speak your mind. If one of them joined a cult (and what religion isn’t?), wouldn’t you care enough about them to try to save them from the lies? Don’t destroy your family over it. but push it as far as you think you can get away with.
June 5th, 2005 at at 4:00 am
From number 8: Even a seemingly harmless faith will, given enough time, mutate into something obstructionist, dangerous or both.
I totally agree, however, that seems to contradict your mild theism theory. We should not lend any credence to religion.
While the theory of gravity has not been proven, I accept it as true based on the evidence and I extend the same logic to evolution.
June 5th, 2005 at at 5:11 am
Thanks for your reply..
My husbands family is Pentecostal. After my husbands mom died of cancer he turned to them and it literally drove me crazy. We almost divorced because it became so bad. He has gotten off his “high horse” as of now. But he does infact still believe in God. His family is content to believe that the bible is true and that with out God there is no life. And that they will go to heaven. Which is just absurd to me. Every holiday is a Lets gang up on Ivy day.. I havent backed down and I dont intend to.
June 5th, 2005 at at 9:47 am
Patrick, I have Harris’ book and it was outstanding. It really opened my eyes to the perils of even moderate religion. Highly recommended.
June 5th, 2005 at at 1:31 pm
Yes, Sam Harris’ book is quite good. Sam Harris is also featured in that new documentary coming out tomorrow about whether or not Jesus ever existed historically (www.thegodmovie.com).
And keep up the good fight Ivy. I would probably have to break up with my fiancee if she ever turned to religion. Luckily she is seemingly becoming more anti-religious every day, although it is more of a passive approach than the more active take on it that I ascribe to. I’m glad that things have gotten better for you.
In my family I am (except for my quiet computer addict brother) the sole atheist or religious skeptic. Some of my aunts and uncles give thousands to the church every year, or go to missionaries in Mexico. Despite me being the minority I think I hold quite a bit of subconcious influence due to the fact that I attend an Ivy league school and have had more schooling than any of them have. I think it makes them a little more hesistant to be openly-religious at our family functions. While it doesn’t prevent them from going to church, perhaps my speaking out prevents them from wasting too much of their precious lifetime with religion.
June 5th, 2005 at at 2:35 pm
I Am, I read your first post, and I must say that you and I share a very similar background. Roman Catholic (my brother and I were even altar boys!), very religious childhood, although my father was not religious, but around 12/13 I started thinking for myself. By 17 I was calling myself agnostic and by 19 atheist. I also went through the Eastern religion faze (I’m still pretty enchanted by zen). Anyway, I’ve had quite a different experience in the past few years. Everyone except for my mother in my immediate family is at least agnostic, and we only go to Church on Christmas. In addition, I think I’ve had a major effect on my friends. So I guess my point is, being up front about your beliefs may be a very good thing, because it will get the people around you thinking and expressing their own doubts.
June 5th, 2005 at at 2:44 pm
Delta, I must say, your blog is fantastic. You and I are in deep agreement. I’ll be there regularly.
June 5th, 2005 at at 5:48 pm
Ivy, I feel for you if your husband’s family is pentacostal. I call it
‘pent up hostile’. Dancing around snakes to prove your pureness and speaking in gibberish- I mean tongues- is bad enough, but they do more than that. I have a co-worker that goes to revivals all the damn time. She gives (this is no exagerration) probably close to half of her income (she doesn’t need to work) to her church. She said she wasn’t religious five years ago, but that her husband had a few serious accidents that proved the existence of god to her. He cut himself with a miter saw, and then tried to pry loose a buried wire from a tiller (that he cut). He was seriously injured in both cases but survived, so ofcourse it was a miracle. It couldn’t be that her husband is an idiot with power tools. She said a warm sensation and calmness washed over her after these incidences ( I suppose this would be conversion due to reaching a breaking point). Her family was also religious and reminded her constantly that she would burn in hell. She told me all of this and then asked if I believed jesus christ was my lord and savior. I told her no. She said she would pray for jesus to show me the way. I told her to have him e-mail me instead of making me hurt myself to believe (that went over well!). Pentacostals believe in the literal translation of the bible. I asked her why some people in the bible lived for hundreds of years. She said (with a straight face) “Yeah, I guess they did live a long time back then”. She prays for me and my co-workers to have a safe trip home every night. She prays for me to find jesus. She prays fifteen minutes before every god-damn break we get at work. I would be written up if I didn’t work fifteen minutes before break. She is a sincere, innocent woman, but a completely hopeless case. She has a bible next to her, open at all times while she is working. There are more passages highlighted with marker in her bible than are left alone. She plays evangelistic sermon tapes all night long, driving her immediate co-workers crazy. But we can’t do anything about it because that would interfere with her religious beliefs. What a crock.
June 5th, 2005 at at 5:59 pm
By the way, I come from a family that didn’t push religious beliefs on me. From what I’ve heard from most other atheists, I am a rarity in that I never converted from a religion to atheism. I was agnostic until my early twenties, then declared myself an atheist and let everyone know it. Much of my family is religious, though. And I do have run-ins with them. I let most of them be, because it would be futile to insult them. I don’t back down from a confrontation though. If any of them question me or say something I feel needs attention, I speak up. I suggest anyone should stand up for what they believe. My parents found religion in their fifties after they had divorced. I pointed this hypocrisy out to them, only to be told everything changes when you turn fifty. I told them I accepted death a long time ago and gave up childish beliefs. It was kinda like telling your mom and dad there is no santa claus.
June 5th, 2005 at at 7:02 pm
I can see that boywonder. I grew up with parents who never forced religion on us. However my grandmother was Presbyterian and took me to church with her. My mom had been raised baptist. My parents never really felt it was important for us to go to church and we never discussed God. As a teen I started looking for something more and went to a non denom church. That lasted a few years. It wasnt until my little brother died in 1999 (he was 3 years old) that my parents turned to “god”(their words) And I turned away. I of course had questioned it for years. As my family likes to say I’m the rebel of the bunch. I cant ever go with the crowd on anything.. A few months back i found myself stuck in a vehicle with my dad for 6 hours on a road trip. That was the LONGEST six hours of my life. Because we argued and argued and argued over “God” and of course I was told “DONT YOU DARE Turn your back on GOD! He is the ONLY SALVATION YOU HAVE!”. Um okay dad..
June 7th, 2005 at at 11:49 pm
“Arrogant” only means that you say what you mean and mean what you say. I never let people use that word to bully me into being dishonest for the sake of social convention. Too many people worry about seeming like they think they were right. Of course we think we are right–otherwise voicing opinions would be dishonest. Leave it to ad execs and politicians to spin.
I like it, and I like “arrogant” people. I am only annoyed by people who beat about the bush.
June 8th, 2005 at at 12:53 am
Hellbound, I’m just saying your average joe christian thinks he’s sinned everytime he remembers he has a penis. Christians can’t handle perceived arrogance. IF I Am’s goal is to influence religious people who visit this site, then he must cater to his audience. I think you can have your cake and eat it too. He doesn’t have to change his style, he just needs to be aware he’s dealing with people who take offense to most everything. By the way, I like your blog too. I’m starting to make a habit of checking it.
June 13th, 2005 at at 4:22 am
I don’t know if my family are atheist or not. My grandfather had no life without the church…he moved across the street from it, so he could go more often. My parents never really went, but I had to go with granddad a lot. My parents don’t claim to believe, but they also would probably reject the label ‘atheist’. Personally, I tried to believe a few times, but when I sat back, took a deep breath, and realized how utterly absurd the whole thing was, it was such a relief. Perhaps we should go door-to-door, trying to convert people: “Excuse me, have you ever considered rejecting Jesus Christ as your personal saviour?”
June 13th, 2005 at at 9:41 am
I finally rejected Jesus Christ at age 50 after 40+yrs as a firm believer… now, instead of “thank God” for everything, I “thank Blog”… I owe my escape & my sanity to BLOGs like this… my entire family (both sides including my wife) are still died-in-the-wool Christians… I relish the discussions (although, I’m not allowed to “take the grandchildren to Hell with me”)… my mother, in her special inane criticism, has summed me up quite nicely: “You think too much.”, “You’re too logical.”, “You read the wrong things.” & “You watch the wrong things on TV.”… I guess thinking is a sin & one of the Devil’s tools… Blog bless you guys for piercing the darkness of my biblically indoctrinated mind…
June 13th, 2005 at at 10:52 am
DamnRight:
Congratulations on beginning to think for yourself. It takes a lot of guts to make that kind of change in your life, particularly after four decades of belief. I don’t know how to say this without sounding condescending, but I’m proud of you. 1 comment like yours makes all the time I put into this blog worth it.
June 19th, 2005 at at 1:06 am
You know, one of the things that I have noticed about my many visits to a fairly large number (sorry, don’t know how many, have not been counting) of ‘atheist’ websites and blogs, are the very small number of people who actually visit them, this conclusion of mine being based upon the fact that I always come across the same people leaving messages on them (ex. ‘boywonder’, ‘vyjack’, ‘delta’ et cetera).
Can I conclude from this that atheism, which it’s practitioners claim is not a ‘belief system’ even though it has it’s very own ‘Ten Commandments’ now - a Statement of (Dis)beliefs, is well and truly in decline as a belief system? Could one of the primary reasons for this decline be the simple fact that, ultimately, it’s arguments against the existence of, for want of a better term, God, are so pathetically weak?
Also, why is it that I very rarely come across anyone on any of these sites who is willing and able to present a view that isn’t something along the lines of ‘yeah, that was telling him! That rotten, ignorant bible-thumper’?
I really liked number 7: “Proof is at my discretion”!!! Do you really expect anyone to go along with this ‘definition’ of proof??? ‘At your discretion’ is just another way of saying, ‘if there is evidence for the existence of ‘the supernatural’ or something like it, I will just close my eyes and ignore it - nothing must be allowed to disturb my blissfully ignorant state of mind’.
One last thing. Most (if not all) atheists are among the most strident of supporters of the existence of an ‘objective reality’, and for this the ‘burden of proof’ lies squarely with them; where is the proof that there is, in fact, only one reality that is valid. It can quite easily be argued that each individual is a universe unto her/himself, the manner in which each individual perceives and experiences their version of reality being different to everyone else’s.
But oh, silly me, of course. It is only ‘the scientific view’ that has any merit, a point of view that cannot explain the concepts of justice, truth, beauty, self-awareness, intuition et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, but since these ideas have no ‘objective’ reality, do they not exist? According to your clumsy ‘definition’ of reality they dont!
June 19th, 2005 at at 7:18 pm
[…] d is that I want to waste no time in replying to a theist who commented this morning on my Statement of (dis)Beliefs. I will address Peter’s comments point by poin […]
July 6th, 2005 at at 12:05 pm
I prefer to simply read. I guess you could call me one of the (usually) silent majority.
April 13th, 2006 at at 11:41 am
[…] Carrying on round, we discover that an evangelist has set up a tent to proclaim his beliefs. There’s no need to call security (not that we have any round here, anyway) because it’s just the Evangelical Atheist offering us his Statements of (Dis)Belief. I’d advise you to stick around and listen to the whole thing because otherwise he’ll get angry and damn you to … well, I guess we’ll have to get back to you on that. I have the same problem recruiting people for door-to-door atheism - it’s very hard to get people to spend their nights arguing on strangers’ doorsteps when there isn’t a giant invisible metaphysical stick hanging over their head. […]