Ok before I begin this post, I would like to note three things:
1. This is a completely random topic, I don't know what made it pop into my head, but I was pondering the idea recently and it started bugging me. So now you all get to enjoy the wonderful world of my warped mind.
2. This is completely unrelated to sports, but I like to shake things up every once in awhile.
3. I don't necessarily mean to offend anyone. Well, other than Catholics, of course.
I was pondering life yesterday, in the shower I believe (I think better in the nude). I started thinking about ghosts, not sure why, I’m just odd I supposed. More specifically, I started to think about how many people I know believe in ghosts, and comparing that number to the number of people who believe in God.
I came to the conclusion that almost everybody I know, or at least everyone I know well enough to understand their religious beliefs, either believes in God, or is at least open to the idea of the existence of God. So, working under that assumption, lets just say that number is 100% - essentially 100% of people I know fairly well believe in God.
Now, I must ask, how many of those people believe in ghosts? Or supernatural beings, or whatever you want to call them. I would guess that number is significantly smaller. In fact, I would venture to say more people do not believe in ghosts than people who do; or, at best, the numbers are 50/50 on the pro ghost anti ghost debate.
There is a discrepancy here, however. Believing in God, is equally absurd as believing in ghosts.
Anyone who claims an all knowing, all seeing, all powerful omniscient being is more logical than a disembodied spirit of a deceased human, is ignorant. Plain and simple. Technically, both ideas are absurd, so what makes one more absurd than the other? Because the existence of God is more widely accepted, that makes it more logical? That is the absolute epitome of ignorance. The majority opinion is not always the correct opinion.
Now, this brings up a greater issue with religious ideology in general.
All religions are founded on the concept that the ideas they set forth are correct, and everyone else is wrong. The fact is, however, whether you believe the teachings of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, a monkey alien warlord, or anything else, your ideas are illogical. They just are. This doesn’t make them wrong necessarily; it just makes them devoid of reason. (The divisiveness of organized religions, however, is wrong, and the reason that their existence is not only bad, but dangerous, for humanity. But that is a whole other issue.)
No religious belief system is based on logic, which is why they simply call it faith. Again, this doesn’t make your faith wrong, necessarily, it just makes a practice founded on passion as opposed reason.
People who believe ghosts are the exact same way.
Many ghost believers are equally fanatical on the “we’re right you’re wrong” front, but their ideas have a similar level of rationality. And, technically, one would likely have a much easier time arguing the existence of supernatural beings than the existence of God – who is in principle a supernatural being as well, by the way. Poor logic is just one (of many) problem(s) I have with staunchly religious people. Ghosts are just the example I have chosen to focus on here.
Most of the lunatic religious (I’m looking at you Captain Catholic) are completely caught up in the idea that the Bible and their religion’s teachings are absolute. So much so that they throw anything even resembling reason out the window. Ghosts can’t exist because when people die their spirit (which in and of itself is absurd) automatically goes to heaven or hell. Or, possibly, purgatory; you know, if you are into that sort of thing. This is more rational than the idea that people remain on earth as disembodied beings? Really?
Oh wait, no it isn’t.
Technically, neither one makes sense. Technically dead things are dead. And, fine, if you believe in some other mystical force, just don’t try to claim your mystical force is better than some other mystical force – My God could so beat up your God!
I know “religious” people who literally laugh at the idea of supernatural beings. They neglect one tiny detail, however: Their entire belief system is based on a supernatural being. Your supernatural being is not more rational than any other super natural being. If you are going to believe in God, you are essentially obligated to at least acknowledge that ghosts may exist. You are not obligated to believe in them, but you are a raging hypocrite if you do not at least acknowledge their existence. Quit simply, you are an ass.
I’m not here to decide who is right and who is wrong. That is an unanswerable question, people believe what they believe and that’s just the way it has always been and will always be.
All I’m asking is for people who have one set of illogical beliefs, to accept the fact that another set of illogical beliefs is possible. It doesn’t matter what you believe, it matters how you react to what others believe. If you are so blinded by the fact that “I’m right and you’re wrong,” you are not a morally righteous person, no matter what your belief system tells you.
I’m not saying everyone should believe in ghosts. I’m not saying everybody should believe in God. All I’m saying is, if you believe in one, you are obligated to acknowledge the possibility of the other’s existence. Otherwise, you have no argumentative footing to stand on, you have no ability to be taken seriously, and you look like an ignorant fool.
If you don’t believe me, maybe you should hop in the shower. The nudity might help you think.
-Juice
Posts
1 comment:
You should know that you sound incredibly pompous and pretentious in this, so if that's what you're going for you got it.
I'm not quite sure you understand what illogical means. Let's play out the scenario you created in your post a little more. Someone who, as you said in such a biased way, believes in God (irrespective of religion, by the way - this does not pertain purely to Christians!) is holding an illogical belief. That's far from proven in your armchair philosophy, but whatever. Let's just accept that it's illogical to believe in God. Maintaining an illogical belief or conclusion does not mean that a person is therefore incapable of logic. Most often, people are incapable of seeing themselves with enough objective perspective to understand when they are acting illogically. Saying that accepting one illogical conclusion necessitates that all other illogical conclusions is ludicrous. I honestly can't believe you're trying to talk about this topic seriously (which you obviously are) and come to such unfounded and laughable conclusions of your own.
I'm sorry, I'm being harsh and I don't mean to be. What I'm trying to say is that there is a huge difference between someone who knowingly accepts that the conclusion they hold is illogical and someone who does so unwittingly. Your argument can be applied to the latter group, I think, more easily than the first.
And another thing you should think about: the metaphysics of knowledge and understanding. You're obviously framing your argument with the inherent bias that knowledge and understanding are based on scientific methods: hypothesis, testing, understanding. You seem to be saying that behaving logically is limited to accepting what is known and knowable through scientific reasoning. The problem with this line of thought is that it's both circular (knowledge validates itself) and very limited. If you honestly think that there's nothing we as humans know besides what we are able to prove or experience with our senses or scientifically, I urge you to think about instances you have known things without the benefit of those assurances. You've never had a gut feeling something was going to happen? You've always made your decisions based on reason and science and not instinct? If so, I think you're missing out.
Again, sorry if I came across as saying offensive things. I didn't mean to, but I'm way too lazy to go back and change what I wrote.
Post a Comment