I might have pictured a rather grim visual in the previous text which is something I sometimes do when I’m a wee bit angrier than usual (which I am now for moon-related reasons or maybe the planes fly too low today), to say the least. Yes, I know my writing style doesn’t leave much to debate but that’s really the point of it all – I can’t (and won’t) try to debunk various myths or convince the unbelievers I’m right and they’re wrong. The fact is that those who “truly believe” won’t be moved by logic or reason, their belief rests on feelings and emotions. It’s like a blind person arguing with a deaf one over which sense is more important, sight or hearing. I, for instance, believe that what we do defines our morals while a religious person believes morality is a consequence of faith in something, of adhering to strict precepts from an unseen, omnipotent and omniscient deity (or deities). The most used argument I’ve heard about why atheism is bad was that without fear of a god what’s to stop us from becoming wrong-doers (to put it mildly). Well duh, reason and ethics is the obvious answer but if one really “believes” then I can’t really use reason and logic to refute their arguments, they “feel” they’re right and I’m obviously wrong then because there absolutely has to be two sides to this, innit? Ethics obviously can’t coexist with both belief and lack of belief, right? Arguing with one of those is like playing chess with a pigeon, eventually and regardless of your skill at chess, the pigeon will knock the pieces over, crap on the chess table and strut around looking like it’s won. You’ll never win if the other person you’re playing with won’t know or care what the rules are.
This blog, journal or whatever you want to call it wasn’t really created for any others (except myself) to read and judge, and I realize since it’s rather public people will see it so I’m toning down on my ravings (imagine what I’m about in person, holly molly!). But since there will be two kinds of people on and off around here, those who think I’m right and won’t think I’m overdoing it while those who think I’m wrong will also look for reasons to debunk me, so what I’m doing is I’m really trying to chase away those “believers” while offering enough incentive for those who only think they’re believers (but haven’t been measured yet, just like Schrodinger’s grumpy cat) to start asking questions – even about my being right or wrong.
The whole concept of belief ignores questions, you either have it or not. So when you start asking questions, you’re using your neurons for something. If you question me, you’re thinking – painful as it may be – but only thinking makes us improve. Ever see that Japanese monkey business? The one that’s the symbol for female obedience? See nothing, hear nothing, say nothing. That’s what fundamentalist, unchanging and static belief is, blind, deaf and mute obedience.
You can believe in yourself, which is good. You can also believe in others, which can be painful quite often, but is also good. But if you truly believe you’re nothing without a higher power to guide you and order you around then I got some news for you – you’re either going to have your neurons decay from lack of use in a few years or you just want to be free of any kind of responsibility for your actions. Those brainwashed or dumb or unthinking aren’t exactly models but what really terrifies me is the latter ones, those who think belief justifies anything, from crusades to terrorism (you know the word jihad isn’t exactly equivalent to holy war, right?)..
Those will not care of reasons, ethics or pity – they will blindly follow their supposedly infallible leaders and when confronted to the enormity of their actions they’ll say they’re not to blame. I followed the scriptures, I did what was prophesized or what my belief, god, priest, mullah, general, admiral or whatever told me, so I’m not responsible for any of it, you see. I was ordered to, I HAD to obey. I’m a good man, righteous and god fearing, what I did isn’t really me, it doesn’t define me. Any of it ring any bells yet?
What’s the difference between the Islamic State now, the Inquisition that burned Giordano Bruno in 1600 or the Nazi persecution of Judaism? Or for that matter the great leap forward in China. Or the war against the Circassians, or the Holodomor.. Or other atrocities. There’s too many of them and it’d be too depressing to try and count them. No, don’t try to find reasons for them – the only reason was we weren’t judging actions and their consequences, we were busy finding excuses, reasons and avoiding responsibility. Do you think what’s happening now in Iraq, Nigeria, in the Ukraine or in Syria is right? Is it excusable? People die, and we’re asking ourselves if independence of anything is worth killing innocents. Well, it’s not. Nothing is. I understand about fighting to protect life, I get all about self-defense and the need of the military to protect their children and their future from aggressors – that in my book is where violence is absolutely justified but only if it’s used against those who actually are the aggressors and not other innocents.
Defending an innocent is not a valid reason to hurt another innocent. Ergo I won’t understand (as in look for attenuating circumstances in) why the IRA car-bombed the Brits or why there was so much death in Kosovo or the more recent events in Ukraine, and so on. The thing is I really don’t understand wanting to divide one’s country when there’s so much globalization going on and (considering others might) I certainly don’t want to understand how hurting civilians would be justified by that. Everybody and their momma’s wanting the US to remove visas, or the whatsitcalled european Schengen free travel zone to be extended and also crave free trade and free travel and everything else free but they also want to be independent, self-suficient and self-regulated (sounds kinky, aye?). Newsflash folks, if you’re not happy about how the government is using your tax money, strive to change how the government works instead of using rockets on civilian planes or buildings. You can’t be both separated and integrated, unless you’re a quantum entangled particle (negative, I’m a meat popsicle, but that’s besides the point). Spukhafte fernwirkung, innit? If that ain’t possible, ask yourself what is.
My advice to all of you who are reading (and will continue doing it, otherwise ta ta and tut tut) is to question everything and also try to understand everything. That’s how we adapt and survive, as a species. Preservation of knowledge is one thing (also one of the “arguments” that says the church helped us cross the Dark Age), but I think curiosity, the drive to seek answers and ask questions is more important than that. We can only progress if we adapt, if we strive to be a dynamic group, as opposed to a static one. I don’t want to look at physics manuals in museums, I want to understand what makes the universe tick. That’s all there is about it. Belief is static, not dynamic – it offers no adaptation and no answers, if we had only believed maybe we wouldn’t have learned how to use fire and the wheel or for that matter we wouldn’t have passed the test of time.
I said it before and I’ll say it again. All life needs to be protected. But as an addition to that, if you’re coming after me or my family with a weapon you’d better believe I’ll put you two feet under without second thoughts or remorse. However, I won’t be shooting random pedestrians or your family just because you’re at my door cursing me or my scientific promiscuity and I don’t happen to like it.
Also, I crave sugar. Damn weight loss diet for making me cranky. I think I’ll just shame it in the next text. Need beeeerrrr……