The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.
--Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden
And boy the atheists are up in arms! They're mad as hell about my post "Where is Atheism When Bad Things Happen." Many responders informed me that tragedies are normally considered a problem for religion, not atheism. Where is God when bad things happen? Yes, people, I know this. My point was that if evil and suffering are a problem for religion--and they are--they are an even bigger problem for atheism.
The reason is suggested from the quotation given above. When there is a tragedy like the one at Virginia Tech, the ones who are suffering cannot help asking questions, "Why did this have to happen?" "Why is there so much evil in the world?" "How can I possibly go on after losing my child?" And so on.
In my post I noted that Richard Dawkins had not been invited to address the mourners at Virginia Tech. Several atheists--who haven't yet lost their fundamentalist habit of reading--took this sarcastic statement literally. "So what? The Pope hasn't been invited either!" My point was that atheism has nothing to offer in the face of tragedy except C'est la vie. Deal with it. Get over it. This is why the ceremonies were suffused with religious rhetoric. Only the language of religion seems appropriate to the magnitude of tragedy. Only God seems to have the power to heal hearts in such circumstances. If someone started to read from Dawkins on why there is no good and no evil in the universe, people would start vomiting or leaving.
One clever writer informs me that atheists don't deny meaning, they simply insist that meaning is not inherent in the universe, it is created by us. Okay, pal, here's the Virginia Tech situation. Go create some meaning and share it with the rest of us Give us that atheist sermon with you in the pulpit of the campus chapel. I'm not being facetious here. I really want to hear what the atheist would tell the grieving mothers.
Reader Comments ( Page 5 of 10)
61. I am deeply saddened that we're even having this discussion.
There's so much tragedy occurring right now - from the deaths at VT, to the bombings in the markets in Iraq, to Darfur, to...well, to any one of the other innumerable horrors that the world has for us on any given day.
And yet, here we are, name-calling, and asserting that everybody else is some sort of heartless monster.
As a long-term atheist, I can say that my first reaction to any tragedy isn't "get over it." It's not "I'd better pray for them" either, of course. My first reaction is almost always "how can I help?" This is a question asked not just by atheists, not just by christians, jews, muslims, hindus, sikhs, shinto, jains, druze, buddhists, astartu, neopagans, or all the myriad faiths of the world. It's a question asked by humans.
Which, last I checked, we all were.
If you're an athiest, chances are you realize that life is short and there aren't second chances, so that means you've gotta help make the world a decent place for everyone in your short time here. If you're religious, you've got a spiritual commandment to do so. Regardless of the motivation, the end result should be the same - compassion, love, empathy.
Where was God? Where were athiests? Where was anybody? At this point, it's a moot question - it should be where can we all be, right now. What can we do to prevent tragedy? If we can't prevent it, what can we do to help those left behind? No one religion, nor one absence of religion, has a monopoly on empathy or action.
Eric at 10:08AM on Apr 20th 2007
62. Your reliance on a god is nothing but a sign of personal and phsychological weakness, or a general craving of attention. REligious apologists want to find meaning because without it, THEY would feel lost. Atheists, on the other hand, see the meaningless bout of biology, and through understanding billions of years of time and change, have clarity on the idea that there not need be a meaning; we live - we eat - we procreate - we die - we rot.
Could a group of turtles mour their dead children after a predator rips apart five or six nests on the beach? No, it is the way nature works.
Humans have added guns to the equation, and this only increases the chances that death will come earlier. I dont need a personal god to make me feel good, I have intellectual thoughts. Most do. You dont, only a crude need for attention.
Monkey at 8:12PM on Apr 20th 2007
63. Here's what Dawkins actually told the bereaved world when a good friend died:
"He laughed at his own jokes, which good comedians are supposed not to, but he did it with such charm that the jokes became even funnier. He was gently able to poke fun without wounding, and it would be aimed not at individuals but at their absurd ideas....
"Science has lost a friend, literature has lost a luminary, the mountain gorilla and the black rhino have lost a gallant defender (he once climbed Kilimanjaro in a rhino suit to raise money to fight the cretinous trade in rhino horn), Apple Computer has lost its most eloquent apologist. And I have lost an irreplaceable intellectual companion and one of the kindest and funniest men I ever met. I officially received a happy piece of news yesterday, which would have delighted him. I wasn’t allowed to tell anyone during the weeks I have secretly known about it, and now that I am allowed to it is too late.
"The sun is shining, life must go on, seize the day and all those clichés. We shall plant a tree this very day: a Douglas Fir, tall, upright, evergreen. It is the wrong time of year, but we’ll give it our best shot. Off to the arboretum."
and
"It has been our privilege to know a man whose capacity to make the best of a full lifespan was as great as was his charm and his humour and his sheer intelligence. If ever a man understood what a magnificent place the world is, it was Douglas. And if ever a man left it a better place for his existence, it was Douglas. It would have been nice if he'd given us the full 70 or 80 years. But by God we got our money's worth from the forty nine!"
You ought to be ashamed, Dinesh.
Anton Mates at 11:22AM on Apr 20th 2007
64. Sorry, just saw this.
Margaret> I'm baffled. Where did you see anger for believers in this thread? If anything it is the other way around. Atheists are routinely demonized. When was the last time you saw a positive portrayal of an atheist on TV? A movie? When Imus was (rightly) criticized for his distasteful remarks, was he only reprimanded by black female athletes? No. It was by people of all races and religions. Because casual discrimination of black people is no longer fashionable.( Thank Gawd! [/irony]) When was the last time you heard anyone but an atheist speak up for atheists in general when we get bashed? Ever? This is because there is no stigma against bad-mouthing us. Try this experiment. Write a letter to the Editor of your local paper. "Atheists are morally reprehensible. They do not have the same values and ethics as us good god-fearing Americans. They are responsible for many of the horrors of the 20th century, and are ruining this country." Now change Atheist to Black, Jew, Hispanic, Muslim, or Gay. Which do you think would be printed?
Your conflation of religion and morality is pretty standard for a believer. Inappropriate and insulting, but standard. I could make several logical points about it, (crime statistics, poll information, etc.)but I wouldn't convince anyone who didn't already believe it. Just take it on faith (you seem to not have a problem with this) that we are moral people too. And which is better, doing something good just because, or doing it because the Magic Sky Fairy will torture you forever if you don't?
Your conflation of totalitarianism and atheism is also pretty standard. Wildly inaccurate, of course. Communism (which is the only dogmatically godless totalitarian system I know of.) merely substituted one harmful dogma with another. Rational thought will gather evidence and form conclusions based on it. Dogmatic thought will gather evidence to support their conclusions. Do you see why one has done so much more for humanity? The concentration camp crack was to my mind a Nazi reference. Hitler was a Catholic. He referenced god many times in his writings. Look it up. And the 20th century with all its horrors and tragedy is a walk in the park compared to any other period in history.
No anger, no hatred. Just fed up with being told I have to be an amoral soulless degenerate, because I chose, of my own free will, and after much deliberation, to reject the ancient myths that contradict all observed evidence and logic.
Peace
BE
BEpps at 10:26AM on Apr 20th 2007
65. Margaret,
There is no doubt that Mao and Stalin centralized their governments around human rule so their power could be absolute. Much like Akhenaton did in 1350 BC by being the first to centralize power around himself and one god, thus removing the power from the priesthood of pagans, and increasing his own. If you want to talk about Hitler, he was an occultist and religious.
Then we can talk about the atrocities committed by every two bit dictator in the second half of the 20th century – and there were tons. Some religious, some not.
But if we want to look at mess of today it’s a different story. Look around you. It’s all religious sentiments dominating our current tragedies, wars, and terror. In the middle ages and before it was all about religion too. Invoking the name of god to cause destruction is no more moral than killing in your own name.
Morality, (and I do shy away from that word as it has become twisted and foul in the hands of those who kill, maim and corrupt – I prefer calling myself ethical) is not god’s invention. It is the basic human decency. If you need a book to tell you this, that’s fine by me. I don’t need it. I learned these things from my parents.
The point for us is, we don’t believe in divine power. Most of us are familiar with the bible and it makes no sense to us. We won’t believe in a cruel god, who has annihilated vast groups of people starting with Noah. To us this is not divine retribution but the force of nature, or in most instances the arrogance of man.
We see people hating one another for the slight differences in beliefs, people warring over which god is right. Historically this has always been so. Groups and clubs band together and isolate each other. People overpopulate and expand. People want power, and they will invoke anything to get it.
What I don’t understand is why fundamentalist believers have so little respect for this world we live on. If god has created this place for mankind, why destroy it? Why bleed it dry? Why consume all its resources? Why insist on more people who can’t be loved and nurtured, so they will succumb to famine, disease or starvation or add bodies to more wars? Why create hell on earth?
I respect your right to believe in what you will, but I won’t respect anybodies right to propagate division, and this is what Mr. D’Souza is doing. He does not respect our rights. He is a Straussian hate monger, and needs to be called on that.
Joanna at 11:05AM on Apr 20th 2007
66. Being an atheist does not prevent anyone from extending sympathy and condolences. Even if you had a point to your diatribe, it does not address whether atheism is valid.
Eric Vicaria at 9:24PM on Apr 23rd 2007
67. “Believers”,
Just so you know, atheists only bother referring to themselves as such because theists are so dominant in the world and many modern languages have been thoroughly shaped by religious culture and history. (Hence the term popular term “atheists” for those who do not believe in God, and the word “faithful” for those who believe in things for which there is no evidence and no way to prove or test them.) Keeping this in mind, it is scarcely a challenge to “believe” when 1) you’ve got language on your side and 2) you constantly absolve yourselves of any responsibility to provide any evidence or legitimate arguments for the radical beliefs that, in any other context, would be viewed as insane. As Sam Harris points out, when a single person (Cho Seung-Hui, for example) talks zealously about bloodshed, violence, murder, revenge, etc., we rightly look into providing that person with a lengthy stay at the nearest mental hospital. But when hundreds of people line up to drink the blood of Christ and eat his flesh, its just another Sunday mass at the nearby Catholic church. Granted, I can imagine the appeal of thinking that you and everyone you’ve ever known and loved will get to have another kind of existence in what you call heaven––after all, the idea of not existing anymore is not exactly appealing––but unfortunately this belief leads far too many of you to treat life in a very cavalier and idiotic way. The myth that one needs to believe in God or “something greater than ourselves” in order to avoid plunging into nihilism or despair is indeed a creation of Creationists. The realization that you indeed have but one life to live, and that you do not need to adhere to the wrathful rules written down in an ancient book, is wonderfully liberating. And people tend to be less cavalier about life and death (see G.W. Bush and how he treats the troops he claims to support), and less eager to for Armageddon, when they are not convinced that there’s an afterlife awaiting them.
Roger Born,
Like I said above, we only have to address idiotic truth claims because someone is idiotic enough to make them in the first place and then dress them up as “truth” or “knowledge” or “God’s word.” If Dinesh D’Souza thinks it is insightful to point out that the British evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins was not invited to speak at VT, it logically follows that people should ask why D’Souza, Albert Pujols, Vladimir Putin, God, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Stevie Wonder, the Pope, [fill in the blank] were not invited. This is not “having it both ways.” It’s pointing out the stupidity of a bad, tasteless idea that D’Souza felt compelled to fart out into the world amidst an awful tragedy.
tinisoli at 11:22AM on Apr 20th 2007
68. I see that the atheist community is up in arms, because they can offer a shoulder to cry on and someone to talk to.
As for explaining why things like that happen and the apparent question that all the atheist like to ask which is "Why doesn't God stop this", the answer is very simple from a Muslims point of view.
1. All of Gods actions have wisdom behind them, even if we don't understand what it is.
2. If there were no evil on this earth no one would actually know what good was. God has put us on earth to test us who will believe and who will do succeed in doing more good deeds. Also, to differentiate between the good of us and the bad.
3. If there was no evil then there would be no test on this earth, which is just a temporary waiting time compared with the ever lasting life of either in paradise or hell fire.
4. How would people know what generous was if there wasn't stinginess? How would people give charity if there were no poor people? How would there be good if there was no evil? Who would fix your toilets if all the people where white collar workers? Who would clean out your sewage problems if everyone were on the same level? As you can see, none of you will be able to answer these questions.
5. Nothing happens on earth or in the heavens without God allowing it to happen and wanting it to happen, but explaining these concepts are very difficult to someone who doesn't understand Islamic theology of who God is and what He is capable of. In short, Allah gives us the will to choose while at the same time dictating what's going to happen. Thus, you appreciate your health when you are sick or see someone that is sick, you are thankful when your family member survives that tragedy while the other family members didn't.
6. Maybe all of you should reflect on how short this life is and how you will be brought to account for what you used to do, and Allah is sufficient and He is enough as a guardian and protector.
If anyone would like to have other theological discussions you are more than welcome to email me at emarzuq79@yahoo.com
Thanks,
Eyad
-EM- at 11:27AM on Apr 20th 2007
69. Margaret: Namaste means "I bow to you". It is a simple gesture of respect for another human being and a recognition of kinship at the most basic level.
You've responded to Sean's positive, obviously heartfelt posting with a slap in the face of derision and scorn - inappropriate behavior for anyone, Atheist or Believer. Why not take Sean (and other professed Atheists) at his word, and accept that they aren't all the uncaring people that Mr D'Souza makes them out to be? Why help Mr D'Souza smear people as absentee when it is clearly his blindness, not their actual absence that is responsible for his lack of perception?
The bottom line is that when tragedy strikes, Believers to turn community and God while Atheists turn only to community - why is that so difficult to comprehend?
mik at 12:07PM on Apr 23rd 2007
70. Sir, what you are doing here is absolutely despicable. The victims have not yet been laid to rest and you are already standing on their coffins. You are exploiting these tragic deaths to further your personal agenda. Clearly you are the one incapable of compassion. This is a time for everyone - Christian, atheist, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, Wiccan - to stand together to support the families and friends of those who were lost, and to comfort everyone who was affected by these events. This is not a time to be a divider, to cause more angst in the wake of so much pain.
Atheism may not be the best source of comfort for those looking for a reason. The truth is, there is no reason in the grand scheme, just a delusional, mentally unstable young man who chose the worst of all possible actions. For some people, this explanation is sufficient, for others it is not. Some people want to hear that it is all part of "God's Plan". And that's ok. So where are the atheists? They are consoling their family and friends. They are going to prayer circles and candlelight vigils to show their support, and to lend a hand for someone to hold or a shoulder for someone to cry on. And they are trying to figure out how to identify people like this in the future so it does not happen again. But, sir, what they are not doing is using this tragedy as a soap box from which to deride another group.
Tyler at 11:50AM on Apr 20th 2007
71. Eyad,
Atheists ask lots of questions. What many of us choose to do with those questions is to look at more than one magic book, more than one source of knowledge, and to value evidence more than fictions when making decisions. There is simply no good reason to believe in your Allah, your hellfire, your paradise. And we don't see any value in draping God across the universe and then negotiating the absurd territory of explaining why he either is or isn't in charge at any given moment. It is utterly useless. As for your poo-obsessed point #3, there isn't a single thing in there that poses an intellectual challenge to an atheist. You seem to be suggesting that relativity would vanish if people didn't believe in your God. What exquisite nonsense.
And I noticed you forgot to mention how every important it is to murder infidels. Not just for Muslims, but for Christians. Your holy books are literally filled with these admonitions.
tinisoli at 11:37AM on Apr 20th 2007
72. Yeah, yeah, Dinesh atheists are such soulless demons they can't show any compassion. BTW, when are we going to be treated to the first "God Saved ME!" book by some Virginia Tech student who just happened, to survive Seung Cho Hui's rampage, be hiding in a closet or on another floor of Norris Hall.
ets at 12:57PM on Apr 24th 2007
73. D'Souza and other like minded scholars frequently seek to paint atheism as heartless and without conscience. It's the same battle the Catholic Church has waged against secularism for as long as I can recall. The argument basically posits that non-believers must therefore be something approximating ruthless hedonists who spend all of their time trying to disprove God through science. I respectfully disagree.
Even the title of D'Souza's original piece is part of the propaganda. Is he suggesting that there weren't any atheists in attendance at these memorial events or that they would refuse to attend one? The truth is that many atheists are humanists, hence the term I so often heard railed against during my Catholic upbringing...secular humanist. No group has a monopoly on grief nor should anyone attempt to draw those comparisons or conclusions.
So what then is D'Souza flwaed argument actually suggesting? Read a discussion on why science doesn't need religion to have a conscience and a heart...here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com/cgi/mt/mt.cgi?__mode=view&_type=entry&id=819&blog_id=1
Daniel DiRito at 11:46AM on Apr 20th 2007
74. Sorry, bad link above. Here's the correct link to the disucssion on why science doesn't need religion to have a conscience and a heart...here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com/2007/04/lets_blame_the_atheists.php
Daniel DiRito at 11:50AM on Apr 20th 2007
75. We may want to stick our heads in the sand because the images and what they represent offend our sensibilities. I understand that many are in excruciating pain from the loss of loved ones and cannot bear the thought of looking at the person who inflicted this heartache. On the surface this appears to be a clear case of a mentally disturbed individual venting his rage on innocent lives and therefore, our habit is to dismiss it in our minds as an abnormality, a deviation from the norm, but in actuality this is indicative of a very complex phenomenon exemplifying the direction we are going in as a country and ultimately, a species. Our modern culture has seen an over abundance of violent TV shows & movies, violent lyrics in music, cruel and angry reality shows, portrayal of mean-ness as the ultimate form of entertainment. There is a preoccupation with body image, physical appearance, money and so on... look at us, we worship the likes of Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan whose lives are a series of partying, drugs and sex.... Our children are excessively exposed to these themes, images and messages at a very young age. Psychology 101: Children live what they learn. When the predominance of the information children receive from society is of this nature, it then becomes their sense of reality. They believe that these are the things that constitute our experience and existence as human beings…. where is the over abundance of images depicting love, compassion, kindness? We are creating a generation of superficial, plastic, selfish people where the great search in life is about excess and trying to appease an inexhaustible craving for physical pleasure. Our greatest error is thinking that each thing is separate unto itself. For every action there is a reaction and everything is connected, so we are sadly misguided in thinking that what we portray in the name of entertainment does not have a tremendous impact on our children's psyche and present the foundation of their beliefs..... There is no one thing that causes an individual to reach breaking point, instead it is the culmination of everything he has ever experienced in his life and the impressions left upon his psyche, lest we forget all those children who endure physical, sexual, mental and emotional abuse. These experiences are assimilated and ultimately create a toxic fusion of energies and emotions. Children today are feeling more alienated and dis-jointed than ever, as parents are caught up in the "fight for survival" spending more time and energy at work ultimately leaving less and less time for raising their children in a balanced and harmonious manner. Whilst in the mind of the parent what they are doing is in the best interest of the child as they can provide more material things.... the truth is, a child would much rather a sincere hug and the attention of a parent than the latest barby doll or video game.... Do you not think that the 4-6 hours they spend playing bloody video games or watching television shows that depict screaming, cruel and out of control people are laying the foundation of their belief system? Needless to say, the horse is already out the gate and it will take awareness from the majority to recognize it is heading in the wrong direction. I pray that we wake up before many more are unnecessarily slaughtered by these mostly affected minds who in the midst of their darkness, are screaming for us to heed the call....
Nerakami at 12:02PM on Apr 20th 2007