Right now I am in the mountains southern Pennsylvania. It’s absolutely beautiful. I’m at a camp run by the Church of the Brethren
called “Camp Eder” and the facilities are excellent. They take very good care of this camp and I
am truly impressed with the immaculate care and detail they obviously put into keeping
this place up-to-date.
I also get to relax and read – I love to do this. In reading a book I have stopped and started
multiple times, I ran across a thought that triggered another thought, which triggered
another thought. (This trait of mine… to drift fluidly between thoughts that
seem unconnected drives my wife crazy!).
I recentely learned of a book written by Peter Boghossian entiled, “A
Manual for Creating Atheist” or something like that. I do plan to buy and read it although I am a theist
– open minded, yes, but currently convinced that the
metaphysical framework I accept as true is indeed true.
I had not known the name Peter Boghossian until I recently ran
across this title. He has a number of
Youtube videos (I love the 21st century where we can instantly learn
about people and things). There was one
I viewed entitled something like “The Best of Peter Boghossian, which caused me
to somewhat respect what I think to be his message. Of course,
I have a long way to go to really get to “know” this man and what he is really
all about, but he seems to promote certain principles that I also hold: seeking
truth, looking for evidence, respecting others, using your mind, being
reasonable, and a few others ideas. Now,
I am certain the semantics we pour into such principals are slightly skewed from
each other – me being a theist and he trying to convert me - yet I am also
certain that we would agree to the fundamental or primary meanings applied to
such concepts.
With that said, even though I enjoyed Boghossian’s video
clips, I am strongly opposed to how he defined faith in his “manual”. He writes that faith is “pretending to know things that
you don’t know”. For the sake of
argument, let’s “pretend” (pun intended) there are no religions on
the earth. Let’s pretend that all people
on the entire planet are pure naturalist and base everything on empirical data,
evidence, and repeatable and verifiable proof.
If this was the way the world was today, would the word “faith” exist in
the lexicon of at least our shared language – American English? If it did exist, how would it be
defined? If I said, in such a world,
when verbally making a business deal, “I have faith that you will honor your
agreement”, what would I mean? If I
said, in such a world, “I have faith that my wife is faithful and I will remain
faithful to her”, I ask, what would I mean?
Language is not that complicated, nor is t dogmatically ridged, nor sterile. With or without the supernatural, the
fundamental meaning of faith still holds – a type of belief mixed with
trust. It has to do with confidence to
act on what one anticipates will occur based on another person’s integrity, reputation,
or proven track-record. When applied to
religion, the difference is only in the acceptance that a supernatural being
(or realm) actually exists and can be trusted based on what another person, an ancient
text, or trusted cleric has said.
My his definition of faith, Mr. Boghossian betrays a
prejudice. We all have biases and we all have agendas – that I can easily
accept. Yet, to abuse language like this
by making up a definition that is illogical, unfounded, and disingenuous is terrible. I don’t know this man, but from the little I
have gathered, he values and promotes honesty and facts. Minimally, he should replace the ideas
implied in his definition, the idea of “pretending”, with something like “accepting
as true what you cannot prove empirically.”
Instead, he creates unnecessarily an antagonistic relationship with more
than 90% of the human race. His
definition is intentionally provocative.
I must conclude then, based on reason that he is being is disingenuous
by devising and using such a definition to convince theist to become non-theist
or atheist. Such rhetoric amongst those
who are trying to persuade me or convince me that my theistic world-view is
built on mythology, falsehoods, and made-up superstition is not a good place to
start. As I said, I am open minded, but
those that approach me must be honest, reasonable, and - like me – open to change themselves.
I can easily admit that there are many aspects of my view of
reality, built on a theistic foundation, can not be proven empirically. I can confidently embrace that various
foundational components of my “faith system” require the somewhat blind
acceptance of what I cannot prove.
However, I am not pretending anything.
Mr. Boghossian, just like the rest of us, lives his life without being
able to prove many, many things but he is not pretending. Does he “pretend” to care for his family,
even though a child, a relative, or even one’s own spouse could turn on you and
even take your life! This happens all
the time, just as Adam Lanza killed his own mother before shooting a bunch of
children. Granted, mental illness was
involved, but I’m pretty confident this mother didn’t “pretend” to trust her
son. She may have been unwise and even
self-deceived, but she was not pretending.
Mr. Boghossian should be more honest IF he really wants to convince
those of us with religious faith to give it up for a greater truth!
No comments:
Post a Comment